Ransom v. Henderson

Citations

• 114 Ill. 528
• 2 N.E. 667
• 1885 Ill. LEXIS 747

Syllabus

<p>1. Tax title—whether a precept must be shown in support of a tax deed—since the amendment of 1879. Prior to the amendment of the Revenue law of 1879, the failure to produce in evidence a precept, was fatal to a tax title; but since that amendment, making the tax deed prima facie evidence of the regularity of the proceedings, it is not necessary, in the first instance, for the party claiming title under the tax sale to produce such precept. It is sufficient that he gives in evidence his tax deed.</p> <p>2. The production of a tax deed regular on its face, affords prima facie evidence “that the sale was conducted in the manner required by law;” but such prima facie case may be rebutted by evidence showing there was in fact no valid precept, or that the sale was not conducted according to law.</p> <p>3. Practice in the Supreme Court—■considering ruling affecting interests of parties not complaining. On the appeal of one of several defendants, only, from a decree in partition, this court may refuse to consider a ruling as to the interests of other defendants not joining in the appeal and taking no steps to have the decree as to them reversed. A party can not assign for error that which does not prejudice his or her rights.</p>