Wilguess v. Board of County Com'rs of Payne County

Annotate this Case

Wilguess v. Board of County Com'rs of Payne County
1991 OK CIV APP 57
813 P.2d 552
62 OBJ 2464
Case Number: 74124
Decided: 06/11/1991

JOHN H. WILGUESS AND NANCY J. WILGUESS, HUSBAND AND WIFE, APPELLEES,
v.
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PAYNE COUNTY, OKLAHOMA, AND BONITA STADLER, COUNTY TREASURER OF PAYNE COUNTY, OKLAHOMA, APPELLANTS.

Appeal from the District Court of Payne County; Charles H. Headrick, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

William F. O'Brien, Stillwater, for appellants.
Charles L. McBride, Stillwater, for appellees.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

HANSEN, Judge

¶1 Appellees, John and Nancy Wilguess (Wilguesses) contracted to buy certain real property from Orville R. and Toni Sneed (Sneeds). At the time, the property was in foreclosure. The Abstract Certificate obtained by Wilguesses showed delinquent ad valorem taxes on the real property, and reflected entries from the Payne County Treasurer's Personal Tax Lien Docket in the name of Ron Sneed d/b/a Furniture Unlimited and Ron Sneed d/b/a Auto's Unlimited.

¶2 Wilguesses' prospective mortgage lender required that possible clouds on the title be cleared before approving their loan. Although the contract called for Sneeds to pay all taxes owed before closing, they were unable to do so because of financial difficulties. Wilguesses undertook to pay the delinquent taxes.

¶3 Nancy Wilguess, accompanied by their real estate agent, went to the Treasurer's office to determine the amount of delinquent taxes then owing. She paid the delinquent real property ad valorem taxes, but was informed no personal property taxes were outstanding. There was testimony the Treasurer's office was asked to review their delinquent tax records for the names as listed in the abstract.

¶4 Upon the insistence of the prospective lender, Wilguesses' real estate agent returned to the County Treasurer's office and obtained a certificate stating, "Orville R. and Toni Sneed do not owe any personal property taxes in Payne County".

¶5 Approximately six weeks after closing on the property, Wilguesses received a letter from the County Treasurer's office stating it had been concluded Orville R. Sneed was also known as Ron Sneed. Attached to the letter were statements for Ron Sneed's delinquent personal property taxes totalling in excess of $2,500.00.

¶6 Wilguesses attempted to reach an agreement with County to the effect that Ron Sneed's delinquent personal property taxes would not be considered a lien against their real property. When no agreement could be reached, Wilguesses filed this action. They asked the trial court to quiet title in them and enter judgment finding County had no interest in the real property arising from Ron Sneed's delinquent personal property taxes.

¶7 The trial court ordered, in relevant part:

. . . there exists a valid tax lien on the property. . . . Pursuant to the provisions of Title 68 O.S. 24305, 24306 and 24306.1 , the Defendant has no recourse against the Plaintiffs or the subject property as there has been a transfer of ownership and the property is not now "property of the Taxpayer". (Quote by trial court).

¶8 County appeals from that order. We affirm.

¶9 County asserts two propositions in its Brief in Chief. The first contends a valid lien remains effective through subsequent transfers and conveyances, and the second discusses lack of a court's authority to discharge a valid lien.

¶10 Only as an aside does County mention the true issue in this appeal - whether the trial court properly held County had no recourse against Wilguesses or their real property. The trial court specifically found the lien was valid and Wilguesses have not controverted that finding. Further, the trial court did not "discharge" the lien, it found there was no legal authority to enforce the lien against Wilguesses or their property.

¶11 In reviewing actions in equity such as this, we may weigh the evidence, but will not set aside a judgment in equity unless it is clearly against the weight of the evidence. Marshall v. Marshall, 364 P.2d 891 (Okl. 1961).

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.