Porter v. Ivy
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Jackson Chancery Court; George T. Humphries, Chancellor; Tbe tax sale was void. The law was not complied with. Art. 7, § 3, Const.; Kirby’s Digest, § § 1496-8; 100 Ark. 488; 22 Mich. 104; 103 Ark. 579. Tbe record does not show that a vote was taken, but only recites that it was unanimously ordered, not voted, and does not show that a quorum was present. The sale was not void.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jackson Chancery Court; George T. Humphries, Chancellor; Tbe tax sale was void. The law was not complied with. Art. 7, § 3, Const.; Kirby’s Digest, § § 1496-8; 100 Ark. 488; 22 Mich. 104; 103 Ark. 579. Tbe record does not show that a vote was taken, but only recites that it was unanimously ordered, not voted, and does not show that a quorum was present. The sale was not void. All necessary steps were taken according to law as the record shows. 81 Ark. 73-79; 71 Id. 222; 107 Id. 374-380. Every presumption is in favor of the legality of the proceedings. 3 Cyc. 275; 31 Ark. 193; 2…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCULLOCH, C. J.
This case involves .the question of the validity of a tax sale of land in Jackson County, which is assailed on the ground that the record of the county court fails to show the levy of taxes in accordance with the requirements of the statute. The contention in ■support of the attack upon the validity of the sale is that the record of the levying court fails to show in detail the affirmative and negative votes on the proposition or motion to levy the taxes as provided by statute, which reads as follows:
‘ ‘ The clerk of the circuit court in person, or by deputy in his capacity as clerk of the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hilliard v. BunkerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1900
- Morris v. Levy Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
3Cited by3 opinions
- Lambert v. ReevesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1937
- Lambert v. ReevesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1937
- Nichols v. KesselbergSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1947