Fagan v. Rosier

Citations

• 68 Ill. 84

Syllabus

<p>1. Colob ob title—a question of law—good faith one of fact. What is color of title, is purely a question of law, to be determined by the court from an inspection of the papers relied on as constituting color; but the good faith of the party claiming under it, is a question of fact, to be proven and determined as any other fact in issue before the jury.</p> <p>3. A deed which purports to convey the land in dispute, although the grantor had no authority to convey the title, as, when he purported to convey, as administrator of the estate of a deceased person, the land of the deceased, under a special act of the legislature which was unconstitutional and void, is good as color of title.</p> <p>3. Limitation—under act of. 1839—payment of taxes by wrong description. On the trial of an action of ejectment, the defendant, for the purpose of proving payment of taxes on the land for seven successive years, under color of title, offered tax receipts for the years 1856 to 1864 inclusive, which the court rejected for the reason that the land was misdescribed as lot No. 39 N. W. end of survey 117-135. It appeared that the land in dispute was so described in a plat of a survey made at the request of the surveyor, and so assessed from 1856 up to 1864: Held, that the court erred in excluding the tax receipts, as, if the taxes were actually paid the statute was complied with, whether the land was properly described or not.</p> <p>4. Evidence—parol to prone leny of taxes, not proper. The admission of parol testimony to prove the levy of taxes by a town is clearly erroneous. The record of the levy is the best evidence of the fact.</p>