Barnard v. Hoyt
63 Ill. 341
Ill.1872Check TreatmentThis case does not differ in principle from Gage v. Rohrbach, 56 Ill. 262, Same v. Billings, ibid. 268, and Reed v. Tyler, ibid. 288. It was there held that a court of chancery might interfere in behalf of a party in possession, to remove the cloud occasioned by an invalid tax sale under which title was claimed. In this case notice of the sale was not given in the manner required by the constitution and by the statute.
The decree is affirmed.
Decree affirmed.