Soniat v. Donovan

Citations

• 118 La. 847
• 43 So. 462
• 1907 La. LEXIS 818

Syllabus

<p>1. Prescription — Purchase at Tax Sale.</p> <p>A purchaser at a tax sale, in good faith, who has a title from the proper officer, valid in form, with no defect upon it and patent, and who has possessed by himself and his authors for 10 years, has acquired an indefeasible title, and may successfully defeat the claims of the original owners. Giddens v. Mobley, 37 La. Ann 417; Heirs of Wykoff v. Miller, 19 South. 478,48 La. Ann. 476; Michel v. Stream, 19 South. 215, 48 La. Ann. 341; Gauthier v. Cason, 31 South. 3S6; 107 La. 52; Jopling v. Chachere, 32 South. 243, 107 La. 534; Cane v. Herndon, 32 South. 33. 107 La. 591 ; Muller v. Mazerat, 33 South. 104, 109 La. 118, 121; Cooper v. Falk, 33 South. 567, 109 La. 480.</p> <p>iEd. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 1, Adverse Possession, §§ 459-462.]</p> <p>2. Specific Performance — Defenses — Void Tax Deed — Prescription.</p> <p>Where, in an action brought against a defendant to force him to a specific performance of his agreement to buy certain real estate, the latter sets up against plaintiff’s title to the property that it was derived from a tax sale which for grounds assigned was null and void, -he cannot urge that it was the duty of the plaintiff to file to his objections formal pleas of prescription. Plaintiff was only called upon to show as a fact that, if the objections were urged by the original owner, they would be, repelled by prescription.</p> <p>3. Taxation — Tax Sale — Validity.</p> <p>The fact that at the time of a tax sale the property sought to be sold was under administration did not prevent the tax collector from proceeding with the sale. Flower, King & Putnam v. Beasley, 28 South. 322, 52 La. Ann, 2056.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>