McLauchlan

Action to quiet title to real estate. The court found in favor of the validity of certain tax proceedings and tax deeds issued thereunder by virtue of which defendants asserted title to the property in controversy, and gave judgment for defendants. Thereafter, the court made an order granting plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial “because of the insufficiency of description in the tax deeds and assessments.” Defendants appeal from this order.

The description of the property as contained in both the assessment-roll and deeds under which defendants claim title is as follows: “In Los Angeles city, in Los Angeles county, in Clifton Tr., lots 6, 7 and 8,” the same, however, being separately assessed. It has been repeatedly held that such an assessment is insufficient to identify the property, and hence, standing alone, it is prima facie invalid. (Baird v. Monroe, 150 Cal. 560 , [ 89 Pac. 352 ]; Fox v. Townsend, 152 Cal. 51 , [ 91 Pac. 1004 , 1007]; Houghton v. Kern Valley Bank, 157 Cal. 289 , [ 107 Pac. 113 ].) Notwithstanding the fact that such description is, when considered alone, insufficient, the party relying upon the assessment containing such incomplete description “may…