Henderson v. De Turk

Good Law
164 Cal. 296·1912 Cal. LEXIS 344·128 P. 747
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 5, 1912L.A. No. 2887.California902 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff and an order denying motion for new trial in an action to quiet title to certain real property in Los Angeles County.

Defendant claims solely under a deed from the state based on a sale and alleged deed to the state on account of delinquent taxes. The deed to the state recited the name of the person assessed as “E. W. Davies,” while the assessment was to “E. W. Davis.”

The law in force both at the time of the sale and the time of the execution of the deed, provided that the deed to the state must recite, among other things, “the name of the per son assessed.” (Pol. Code, sec. 3785.) This means, of course, the name of the person assessed as it appears upon the assessment-roll. It has uniformly been held in this state that a tax deed which misrecites or omits to recite any one of the facts required by the statute to be recited has no effect at all as a conveyance, the theory being that it is competent for the legislature to prescribe the form of instrument which, as the result of a proceeding in invitum can alone divest the citizen of his title, and that where the statute prescribes the particular form of the tax deed, the form becomes…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.