From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McCoun v. Pierpont

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 1, 1920
194 App. Div. 912 (N.Y. App. Div. 1920)

Opinion

November, 1920.

Present — Jenks, P.J., Mills, Rich, Putnam and Kelly, JJ.


We agree in the conclusions that these tax sales did not give a good title. Such vacant lots were not sufficiently described on the assessment roll. There was also a lack of definiteness in advertising the lots for sale. In such notice these lot numbers are found in the fifth column. These block and lot numbers are supposed to refer to the Leavitt map in the second column. Such a wide separation would readily mislead. Also by reason of village boundaries the block numbers do not follow an ascending numerical series which would also perplex a reader. The judgment dismissing the complaint and canceling the tax deeds is, therefore, unanimously affirmed, with costs.


Summaries of

McCoun v. Pierpont

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 1, 1920
194 App. Div. 912 (N.Y. App. Div. 1920)
Case details for

McCoun v. Pierpont

Case Details

Full title:HARRIET J. McCOUN, Appellant, v. AMY K. PIERPONT and NELLIE CRANZ…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 1, 1920

Citations

194 App. Div. 912 (N.Y. App. Div. 1920)