State ex rel. Rosenblatt v. Heman
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Appeals. 1. It appears, from the petition, that judgment was regularly obtained against this property, and that it was regularly sold for the taxes of 1868, and that the taxes sued for are the same for which the property was sold or forfeited to the State under the law in force at that time.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Appeals. 1. It appears, from the petition, that judgment was regularly obtained against this property, and that it was regularly sold for the taxes of 1868, and that the taxes sued for are the same for which the property was sold or forfeited to the State under the law in force at that time. It follows that any pecuniary demand which the State had, especially after the end of two years allowed to redeem, had become satisfied and extinguished; the State has either the land or nothing at all. The lien attempted to be imposed is, as alleged, for taxes “ due or…
1Opinion of the CourtNapton, J.
This action originated in the circuit court of St. Louis city, to enforce the lien claimed by the State for back taxes, as directed by the revenue law of April 12th, 1877. A demurrer was filed to the petition, which was sustained by the circuit court, but overruled by the *449court of appeals, and tbe demurrer presents tbe only question in the case. This land was forfeited to tbe State for the non-payment of taxes for the year 1868 under the revenue law of 1865, and it is insisted that under that law the State, acquired the title to all lands not sold to individual purchasers, and consequently'…
2Cited by21 opinions
- Palmer v. Southern Express Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1913
- Riggins v. TylerTennessee Supreme Court · 1915
- Samuelson v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1906
- Bowers v. Missouri Mutual Ass'nSupreme Court of Missouri · 1933
- City of Jefferson v. WhippleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1880
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.