OLDHAM v. TUCKER

OLDHAM v. TUCKER
1940 OK 386
105 P.2d 757
188 Okla. 13
Case Number: 29525
Decided: 09/24/1940
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

OLDHAM, Adm'r,
v.
TUCKER, Adm'r.

Syllabus

¶0 TAXATION--Invalidity of resale tax deed to improved realty in city sold at resale in 1931 for less than amount of taxes, interest, etc.
Where improved real estate in a city was sold at resale in 1931 for less than the amount of taxes, interest, penalty and costs due thereon, the resale and the deed based thereon are void.

Appeal from District Court, Comanche County; Toby Morris, Judge.

Action by M. A. Tucker, Jr., administrator of estate of M. A. Tucker, deceased; W. L. Oldham, administrator of estate of W. T. Oldham, deceased, intervening. Judgment for plaintiff, and intervener appeals. Affirmed.

John F. Thomas, of Lawton, and M. Bristow, of Oklahoma City, for plaintiff in error.
Paul Pugh, of Oklahoma City, for defendant in error.

HURST, J.

¶1 The question involved in this case is whether the resale tax deed under which the intervener, Oldham, plaintiff in error herein, claims title is valid. The deed was made and recorded in 1931 pursuant to resale held in 1931. The plaintiff, the former owner, prevailed in the lower court and urges that the tax deed is void for three reasons.

¶2 We find it necessary to refer only to the one contention of the plaintiff that the two lots covered by the tax deed are improved property in the city of Lawton and were sold at the resale for less than the full amount of taxes, interest, penalty and costs assessed against them. The evidence supports the position taken by the plaintiff, and it follows that the resale and the deed based thereon are void. Section 12755, O. S. 1931, 68 O. S. A. § 414; Mahoney v. Barton, 168 Okla. 586, 35 P.2d 443; Pimm v. Waldron, 118 Okla. 5, 244 P. 37; Deneen v. Gillispie, 180 Okla. 342, 70 P.2d 1078.

¶3 Judgment affirmed.