Ferguson v. Etter
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Hempstead Circuit Court in Chancery. contended that there was no legal, Adalid assessment of the land; that the sale by the collector wks void, and the deed conveyed no title to the purchasers: that the defendants were not estopped to deny the validity of the tax sale, because they did not hold under the tax title, nor did Maddux recognize Etter and Williams as joint owners, or promise to pay them rent, or admit them into possession: that if they were tenants in…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Hempstead Circuit Court in Chancery. contended that there was no legal, Adalid assessment of the land; that the sale by the collector wks void, and the deed conveyed no title to the purchasers: that the defendants were not estopped to deny the validity of the tax sale, because they did not hold under the tax title, nor did Maddux recognize Etter and Williams as joint owners, or promise to pay them rent, or admit them into possession: that if they were tenants in common, Maddux had claimed adversely, denying the joint title; had actual possession of the property nearly five years…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Compton
The bill was exhibited by Daniel E. Williams and William H. Etter, against the executor and devisees under the will of Thomas H. W. Maddux, deceased, for partition of certain lands described as lots 1, 2, 3^ and 4, in block 8, and lot 3, in block 22, situate in the town of Washington; and for an account of rents and profits.
The court decreed for the complainants and the defendants appealed.
It appears that at a sale of the premises for taxes, .made by the sheriff on the 3d November, 1851, the complainants and Maddux, the testator, became the purchasers, to whom as tenants in common, the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bettison v. BuddSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1856
3Cited by9 opinions
- Sims v. PetreeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1944
- Billingsley v. LipscombSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1947
- Weichselbaum v. CurlettSupreme Court of Kansas · 1878
- Riley v. Bank of Commerce of RoswellNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1933
- Sewell v. ReedSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1934
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.