Mitchell v. McFarland
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the district court for Steam® county, where the action (brought to determine defendant’s adverse-claims to land in that county) was tried by Baxter, J., without a jury..
1Opinion of the CourtGilfillaN, C. J.
The tax-sales to plaintiff having been found ia all respects regular, the only question for the court to determine, in* order to find the title was in plaintiff, was whether the right to redeem had been terminated by service of the notices required by Gen. St. 1878, c. 11, § 121. These notices are found to have been regular and sufficient in form, and to have been properly served, except that.” they were directed to and served on the plaintiff. At the times of issuing and serving the notices the land was assessed in the name of plaintiff. Whether it would or would not have been good policy in…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wakefield v. DaySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Western Land Ass'n v. McComberSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Hooper v. HenrySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
- Sperry v. GoodwinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
3Cited by20 opinions
- Power v. BowdleNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1893
- Bates v. DrakeWashington Supreme Court · 1902
- Reitz v. CooperSupreme Court of Kansas · 1927
- McHenry v. Kidder CountyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1899
- McHardy v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.