Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

59 Cal. 51

Brady v. Dowden

California Supreme Court

Decided July 15, 1881

California Supreme Court · decided 1881-07-15

<p>Tax Deed—Assessment—Evidence.—The recital in a tax deed as to whom the property was assessed, is conclusive.</p> <p>Held, accordingly, That a deed which recited that the property had been assessed to “ unknown owners, and to all owners and claimants known and unknown,” was void.</p>

Relies on Grimm v. O'Connell · Grotefend v. Ultz

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1881-07-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently July 1923

7 state decisions

2018811890190019101920decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Sharpstein, J.:

¶1The recital in the deed, “ That the said property was assessed for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 1878, for city taxes, at eight dollars and ten cents to unknown owners, and to all owners and claimants, known and unknown,” makes it void, under the decisions of this Court in Grotefend v. Ultz, 53 Cal. 666, and Grimm v. O'Connell, 54 id. 522. If the name of the owner was known it should have been assessed to him. If not, it should have been assessed to unknown owners. (Pol. Code, § 3636.)

¶2In this case the Assessor, according to the recital in the deed, did not follow this plain and simple direction, but assessed the property to owners and claimants known, without naming them. As we construe the opinion of the Court in Grimm v. O’Connell, 54 Cal. 522; the plaintiff is concluded by the recital in his deed, as to whom the property was assessed. He could not be permitted to prove aliwade that the property was not assessed as therein recited.

¶3*52It is-unnecessary to consider the alleged defects in the proceedings which preceded the execution of the deed. The deed being void, it follows that the judgment must be affirmed.

¶4Judgment affirmed.

¶5Myrick, J., and Thornton, J., concurred.

/59/cal/51 · .json · Public domain