Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

Ike VAN METER v. Emma Murphy ADDINGTON et al

TAXATION — TAX DEEDS — SUFFICIENCY OF DESCRIPTION. — Tax deed describing land as "Parts of Section Exc. 1A W of RR 1/4 NE 1/4 Sec. 22 Twp. 2S, Range 3E, Acres 24, 100ths .00 year for which forfeited 1966" held void for insufficiency of description.

CONLEY BYRD, Justice.

Appellant Ike Van Meter acquired a State tax deed from the State Land Commissioner under the following description:

"Parts of Section Exc. 1A W of RR SW 1/4 NE 1/4 Sec. 22 Twp. 2S, Range 3E, Acres 24, 100ths .00 year for which forfeited 1966."

In a quiet title suit by appellees Emma Murphy Addington and Deborah White, the trial court held the description void. We affirm for the reasons stated in Brinkley v. Halliburton, 129 Ark. 334, 196 S.W. 118 (1917), Halliburton v. Brinkley, 135 Ark. 592, 204 S.W. 213 (1918), and Irby v. Drusch, 220 Ark. 250, 247 S.W.2d 204 (1952).

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

VAN METER v. ADDINGTON
(May 3, 1971)