Lutz v. F. P. Gehring Contractor-Builder, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that “production of original documents” showing a right to redeem and “the due payment of the required sum” are “all that is essential to protect the rights of the purchaser”
• noting the certificate holder was “duly notified of the redemption on the day it was made” but “never accepted the redemption money, and the same is still in the sheriff’s hands”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).