Fox v. Turtle

Citations

• 55 Ill. 377

Syllabus

<p>1 Tax title—of the acts of the collector. It was held, in Morrill v. Swartz, 39 Ill. 108, under'the thirty-third section of the act concerning the public revenue, the report required to be filed by the collector, of the delinquent lands, or town lots, must substantially follow the form required by the statute, or no title will pass at the tax sale.</p> <p>2. Same—report of collector, when insufficient. So where the report of the collector simply shows the total amount of taxes due, without specifying whether the delinquent tax was due to the State or county, such an error is fatal, and the purchaser at the tax sale can acquire no title.</p> <p>3. Same—certificate of publication. Where a party claimed title to a lot of ground in the city of Chicago, under a sale for taxes assessed by the city, the certificate of publication of the collector’s notice of his intended application for judgment being signed in the name of the publisher by a third person, the authority of such third person to so use the name of the publisher not appearing, was held insufficient and the tax title defective.</p> <p>4. But it seems, that in case a newspaper were published by a firm or by a corporation, the certificate of one of the partners, or of ail officer of the corporation, the same showing the official connection of the person making it with the newspaper, might be regarded as sufficient.</p>