Legal Opinion · Dissent

Miller v. Murphy

Montana Supreme Court

Decided December 12, 1946No. 8650Published

1DissentJustice Angstman

I do not agree with my associates in holding that the notice of application for tax deed was insufficient for want of further description of the property.

The purpose of requiring notice of tax foreclosure proceedings is “ (1) to warn the owner that his property is to be sold, so that he can prevent the sale by paying his taxes, and (2) to advise prospective purchasers, so that they can investigate the property and determine whether they want to bid. * * * The notice as a whole must be looked to in order to determine the sufficiency of the description; it is sufficient if it is such as will…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Cocks v. SimmonsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1891
  2. Sutter v. ScudderMontana Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Medaris v. TraceySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1934
  4. In Re Kelley's EstateMontana Supreme Court · 1931

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API