From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mahoney v. Weitelmann

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Nov 19, 1935
50 P.2d 1094 (Okla. 1935)

Opinion

No. 25060.

October 15, 1935. Rehearing Denied November 19, 1935.

(Syllabus.)

Taxation — Validity of Resale Tax Deed — Necessary Recital as to Amount Property Sold for.

Resale tax deed must conform to form prepared by State Examiner and Inspector and recite that property was sold for amount equal to or greater than amount of taxes, penalties, interest, and costs due, or, in lieu thereof, state that property conveyed thereby consisted of vacant or located in city or town. Mahoney v. Estep, 171 Okla. 101, 38 P.2d 537.

Appeal from District Court, Oklahoma County; Sam Hooker, Judge.

Action between Fred Weitelmann and Annie G. Mahoney et al. From judgment for the former, the latter appeal. Affirmed.

Robert J. Keevan and Owen F. Renegar, for plaintiffs in error.

L.G. Hayden and Twyford Smith, for defendant in error.


This is an appeal from a judgment and decree canceling a resale tax deed and quieting title to the lot involved in defendant in error.

The resale tax deed contains the same defect as the one involved in Mahoney v. Estep, 171 Okla. 101, 38 P.2d 537, and therein held to be void upon its face.

The judgment and decree below held the resale deed void and voidable. Under the rule announced in Mahoney v. Estep, supra, it was void upon its face. Under said rule the judgment and decree must be, and is hereby, affirmed.

McNEILL, C. J., and BUSBY, PHELPS, and GIBSON, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Mahoney v. Weitelmann

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Nov 19, 1935
50 P.2d 1094 (Okla. 1935)
Case details for

Mahoney v. Weitelmann

Case Details

Full title:MAHONEY et al. v. WEITELMANN

Court:Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Date published: Nov 19, 1935

Citations

50 P.2d 1094 (Okla. 1935)
174 Okla. 591

Citing Cases

Davis v. Harris

"A resale tax deed must conform to the form prepared for resale tax deeds by the State Examiner and Inspector…