Prout v. People ex rel. Miller

Citations

• 83 Ill. 154

Syllabus

<p>1. Taxes—affidavit of collector. Where the affidavit of the collector, on application for judgment against lands, omits to name taxes as due thereon, but only mentions special assessments, it will he presumed that the taxes have been paid, in the absence of proof to the contrary; and the omission of the word “ taxes ” will not vitiate the affidavit.</p> <p>2. Same—presumption in favor of judgment. Where the record, in an application for judgment for a special assessment, shows the amount of such assessment and the costs and then a statement of the total amount, in the absence of proof to the contrary, it will be presumed, in favor of the judgment, that there were no other taxes or assessments unpaid against the land.</p> <p>3. Jurisdiction—-finding as to due notice. Where the court, in its judgment against real estate for special assessments, finds that due notice, as required by law, has been given of the application, this will afford prima facie evidence that the proper notice was given, and the absence of the notice from the record is not sufficient to rebut such finding.</p> <p>4. Special assessment—consolidation of several into one. The consolidation of several separate and distinct special assessments against various tracts of land into one proceeding, when reported for confirmation, when' each lot of land appears only once in the rolls, does not invalidate the proceeding so as to defeat an application for judgment thereon. Even if this was error it could not be reached in a collateral proceeding.</p>