Pierce

Pierce v. Low

Good Law
51 Cal. 580
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 1, 1877No. 4915California255 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

The Revenue Act of 1857 (Sec. 18), required that the tax collector’s certificate and deed should contain the recital, ■ inter alia, that the property assessed was “in accordance with law offered at public auction in front of the county courthouse,” and declared (Sec. 22), that a deed containing the requisite recitals “ shall convey to the grantee the absolute title in the lands described therein,” etc. Such a deed was made prima facie evidence of title. The Revenue Act of 1857 required the property to be sold in front of the county court-house. The statute of 1865-66 permits the sale in San Francisco to be made in or in front of the tax collect- or’s office, but no corresponding change is made as to the recital in the tax certificate or deed.

In the case before us the tax deed contains a recital that the property was “offered at public auction in the tax collector’s office.”

It is not here necessary to decide that a deed not containing the statutory recitals is inadmissible for any purpose, or that it would not constitute prima facie evidence of the truth of the recitals which do accord with the statute. It is quite certain that when a recital to which so extraordinary an effect…

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.