People ex rel. Seale v. Doane

Citations

• 17 Cal. 476

Syllabus

<p>On mandamus against the Sheriff by a purchaser at a Sheriff’s sale of property as belonging to the city of San Francisco on judgment and execution against the city for a deed, the value of the interest sold, or probably the leviable quality of the title, could not be enquired into—the city not being a party.</p> <p>Where the Board of Supervisors of the city and county of San Francisco at a special meeting pass a resolution authorizing Burr, as President of the Board, to redeem certain city property sold at Sheriff’s sale, and the resolution does not authorize the expenditure of any money on the part of the city and county,- and was not published, with .ayes and noes, in a newspaper before final action, according to the sixty-sixth section of the Consolidation Act of 1856 : Held, that such resolution was sufficient authority to the President to make the redemption on the part of the city and county, even though the money for that purpose came from private hands.</p> <p>Held, further, that whether the money tendered by Burr for redemption was his own or the money of the city and county, is matter between them alone.</p> <p>Third persons have no right to inquire from what source a redemptioner gets the money he proposes to use to effect a redemption he is entitled to make.</p> <p>Where a party purchased property at Sheriff’s sale, and on an attempt by the owner to redeem from him, he objects that the amount tendered for redemption is not enough, because not including certain taxes he has paid on the property: Held, that he must show that the taxes were legally assessed and paid, and were a charge on the property before or at the time of the redemption ; and the Tax Collector’s receipts are not sufficient proof.</p>