73 Neb. 179 | Neb. | 1905
In this suit in equity, brought by a grantee of the original owner to redeem land sold for taxes at a judicial sale, a general demurrer was sustained by the court to plaintiff’s petition. He elected not to plead further, and from a judgment of dismissal brings error.
The sale for taxes was made by the sheriff of Rock county upon a decree of foreclosure entered at suit of Rock county. There had been no administrative sale for taxes. The county sought to foreclose a tax lien without resorting to a sale. It procured the premises to be sold to defendant’s grantor, and the sale to be confirmed, and a sheriff’s deed to be issued upon it. Afterwards this title vsms conveyed to defendant. The owner at the time of the assessment of the taxes afterwards conveyed to the plaintiff, Avho brought this action to redeem from the taxes, alleging that the foreclosure proceedings uvere all void, for the reason that the petition of the county in that action showed there had been no prior sale of the premises for taxes. It is also urged that the constitution of the state allows a redemption within two years from any tax sale. It is urged on the other side that the fact that a petition is demurrable does not make the decree of a competent court subject to collateral attack, where the parties were before it and the subject matter one of Avhich the court had cognizance. This is thought to be a sufficient answer to the claim that the foreclosure proceedings are void.
As to the second contention of plaintiff — that he has a. right of redemption — defendant’s answer is not so good. The terms of the constitution are very sweeping. Art. IX, sec. 3. A right of redemption is given from all sales of real estate for the nonpayment of taxes for two years after the sale. This provision has been held to be self-executing. Lincoln Street R. Co. v. Lincoln, 61 Neb. 109. It has also been declared to apply to judicial sales as well as to administrative sales. Logan County v. Carnahan, 66 Neb. 685. We see no reason for suggesting any change in the ruling. The confirmation applied only to the regularity of the proceeding. It held the sale valid and regular, but in no way adjudicated the right of redemption from it. The latter existed by virtue of a self-executing constitutional provision independent of the court. The court’s action must be held to have been taken with this right in view. Of course, in this view, that confirmation, like the other proceedings in this sale, was had provisionally and subject to the right of redemption — the costs of the sale, as well as the costs of foreclosure, being added to the taxes and interest in making the redemption.
It is recommended that the decree of the district court
By the Court: For the reasons stated in the foregoing opinion, the decree of the district court is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings in accordance with law.
Reversed.