Holbrook v. Dickinson

Citations

• 46 Ill. 285

Syllabus

<p>1. Tax Titles—proceedings mmt be regular. To recover under a tax title, the plaintiff must show a valid judgment, a valid precept authorizing the sale, and a sufficient deed from the proper officer. These requirements are indispensable, and none of them can be dispensed with or omitted on the trial.</p> <p>2. In the sale of town lots for taxes, the law must be strictly pursued in all its material requirements.</p> <p>to</p> <p>3. The 14th section of the city charter of Joliet (private laws of 18B7, p. 218,) declares that a deed on a sale for city taxes and special assessments, shall be prima facie evidence of certain facts, and conclusive of others. Among the latter is one, that the sale was conducted in the manner required by law. The charter prescribed no mode of selling except under the order of the council, having left all other things to be regulated by the city ordinances, the same as to the mode of assessment, advertisement and other necessary steps. In all these matters, the person claiming under the deed must prove that by-laws were adopted for the purpose by the city, and had been pursued in making the sale.</p> <p>4. The party resisting a tax title can show by rebutting evidence, and he can show it in no other way, that the assessment was unconstitutional; and if he should should show that, it would, in effect, be to show that no assessment was made.</p> <p>5. Assessments. In taxation, equality and uniformity are indispensable to its constitutionality.</p> <p>6. An assessment upon the size or width of the front of a lot, without reference to its value, is invalid, being in violation of the principle of equality and uniformity.</p>