Smith v. Cassidy
Mississippi Supreme Court
From the chancery court of Lincoln county. Hon. H. C. Conn, Chancellor. The land in controversy belonged to the United States until 1890. It was, however, assessed to an unknown owner on the assessment roll in 1887, and was sold for taxes in 1888, and Cassidy, appellee, became the purchaser. He caused the assessment of 1887 to be changed, substituting his own name as owner on the roll for that of “ unknown owner.”
Read the full summary
From the chancery court of Lincoln county. Hon. H. C. Conn, Chancellor. The land in controversy belonged to the United States until 1890. It was, however, assessed to an unknown owner on the assessment roll in 1887, and was sold for taxes in 1888, and Cassidy, appellee, became the purchaser. He caused the assessment of 1887 to be changed, substituting his own name as owner on the roll for that of “ unknown owner.” A new assessment was made in 1891, and the land was then assessed to Cassidy. It did not affirmatively appear who gave in the assessment of 1891, or how the land'came to be then…
1Opinion of the CourtWhitfield, J.
It is true that taxes are a- charge in rem; that the ownership of the land is immaterial to the right and power of the state to sell for taxes. But it does not at all follow from this that a particular person may not sustain such relation to the land, and may not so conduct himself with respect to it, as to be estopped to buy at a tax sale. The state, in such case, will get its taxes, but he will not get the land. We think it clear that appellee’s relation to this land, and his dealing with respect to it, have been such that he acquired no title at the sale for taxes, in *919Match, 1892, if any…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Tillman v. Richton Tie & Timber Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1955
- Robert v. LewisMississippi Supreme Court · 1919
- Price v. ForetichMississippi Supreme Court · 1925