French v. Spalding
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Writ of Entry, to foreclose a mortgage given by George Taft to the plaintiff. The defendants’ title is founded on a sale of the demanded premises by the collector of taxes of Mason for the years 1873 and 1877. The sale for the tax of 1873 was made by Fox, collector for that year, to Barrett, one of the defendants. Subject to the plaintiff’s exception, the defendants were allowed to introduce the deed of Fox to Barrett, made in pursuance of the sale.
Read the full summary
Writ of Entry, to foreclose a mortgage given by George Taft to the plaintiff. The defendants’ title is founded on a sale of the demanded premises by the collector of taxes of Mason for the years 1873 and 1877. The sale for the tax of 1873 was made by Fox, collector for that year, to Barrett, one of the defendants. Subject to the plaintiff’s exception, the defendants were allowed to introduce the deed of Fox to Barrett, made in pursuance of the sale. The evidence tended to show that the selectmen who assessed the tax in 1873 were acting as such. The court ruled that it was unnecessary to show…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
1. Proof of the deed from Fox to Barrett was only one of several facts which the defendants had to show to make out their title under the sale for the taxes of 1878. The deed was admissible as one of the steps they were compelled to take. Whether in the end they would be entitled to the verdict, depended upon their success in proving all the facts upon which their title rested.
2. It was sufficient to show that the selectmen who assessed the taxes, and the collector who collected them, were officers de facto. Pierce v. Richardson, 37 N. H. 309; Prescott v. Hayes, 42 N. H. 56, 58; Roberts v.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Himmelmann v. SteinerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
3Cited by2 opinions
- Lime Rock National Bank v. HenrySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1897
- Neal v. RuizCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2020