City of Sanford v. Dial

142 So. 233, 104 Fla. 1
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedJanuary 12, 1932
StatusPublished
Cited by36 cases

This text of 142 So. 233 (City of Sanford v. Dial) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
City of Sanford v. Dial, 142 So. 233, 104 Fla. 1 (Fla. 1932).

Opinions

Whitfield, P.J.

—This appeal is from an order overruling demurrers to a bill of complaint brought to foreclose the lien of tax certificates for State and county taxes, the demurrers being addressed to allegations that stated liens of the city for special assessments “are subject, subordinate, junior and inferior to the lien” of the tax certificates for State and county taxes that are being foreclosed.

The Constitution contains the following:

“The Legislature shall authorize the several counties and incorporated cities or towns in the State to assess and impose taxes for county and municipal purposes, and for no other purposes, and all property shall be taxed upon the principles established for State taxation. But the cities and incorporated towns shall make their own assessments for municipal purposes upon the property within their limits.” Sec. 5, Art. IX.

The statutes contain the following:

“All taxes imposed pursuant to the Constitution and laws of this State shall be a first lien superior to' all *5 other liens on any property against which such taxes have been assessed which shall continue in full force and effect until discharged by payment.” Sec. 894, C. G. L.
“It shall be the duty of all sheriffs, commissioners, masters in chancery, or other officers, whose duty it shall be to make sale of any property under the process or order of any court, to pay from the proceeds of such sale, after the payment of the costs of the proceedings wherein the said sale is made, and the counsel fees if any allowed by the court, all taxes, state, county and municipal, which may be assessed, due and unpaid against the said property, including any and all sums which may be required to be paid to redeem the same from the lien of all back taxes to pay certificates outstanding against the same.” See. 954, C. G. L.
“Special assessments for improvements, hard-surfacing, and paving of any streets shall be payable by the owners of the property abutting upon said street' or streets assessed for said improvement at the times and in the manner stipulated in the resolution providing for said improvement, and said special assessment shall be and remain liens superior in dignity to all other liens, except liens for taxes, until paid.” Sec. 104, Chap. 9897, Acts 1923, Sec. 5030, C. G. L.
“Taxes and assessments, together with the interest imposed for delinquency and cost of collection, shall be and continue a lien upon the property assessed, superior to all other liens or claims until the same shall be paid.” Sec. 79, Chap. 9897, Acts 1923. Sec. 7, Chap. 9897, Acts 1923.

Chapter 14572, Acts 1929, authorizes the foreclosure of the liens of tax certificates, Sec. 13; and provides that the lands may be “sold to' satisfy the decree in the same manner as in the foreclosure of mortgages on real estate, and such decree shall have the force and effect of a decree foreclosing a mortgage on real estate.” Sec. 23; and “the purchaser at any sale in suits for the foreclosure of tax certificates or deeds shall be entitled to a deed and the same process and remedies to obtain possession of the *6 premises as in suits for the foreclosure of mortgages. The title to the land conveyed by such deed shall be indefeasible as to all parties defendant in the action.” Sec. 28, Chap. 14572, Acts 1929.

The last' quoted section of the statutes, considered with the other statutes, contemplates that the lands sold under foreclosure decree will bring enough at the sales to pay all State and municipal taxes and all legal and not released municipal assessments against' the property sold and the title conveyed is “indefeasible” “as to all parties defendant in the action;” but State and municipal taxes and assessments remain a lien upon the lands until paid or released, when statutes give the liens and provide that such liens shall continue until paid.

In proceedings to foreclose tax liens under Chapter 14572, Acts of 1929, it is proper for the bill of complaint to set out all the municipal liens against the lands. Amount's due on State and county tax sale certificates being foreclosed are to be first satisfied; and if the lands sold under judicial decree do not bring enough to satisfy all State and municipal liens which by law continue until they are paid, the purchaser of the lands at the judicial sale takes title subject to any unpaid State and municipal tax liens upon the lands including special assessment liens until they are satisfied or released, where such liens are for the benefit or protection of the municipality and such liens by statute continue until paid. The general demurrer was not well taken and the special demurrer is too broad in its scope.

Affirmed.

Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur.

Buford, C.J., and Ellis, J., concur in the opinion and judgment.

Brown, J., not participating.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Thompson v. City of Key West
82 So. 2d 749 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1955)
Shavers v. Duval County
73 So. 2d 684 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1954)
Baldwin Drainage Dist. v. Brown
165 F.2d 260 (Fifth Circuit, 1948)
Burroughs v. State Ex Rel. Commissioners of Land Office
1944 OK 333 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1944)
Marsh v. Dunwody
19 So. 2d 64 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1944)
Nix v. Reynolds
1943 OK 260 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1943)
Boston and Florida Atlantic Coast Land Co. v. Alford
8 So. 2d 483 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1942)
Karn v. Munroe
6 So. 2d 529 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1942)
Prince Hall Masonic Building Ass'n v. City of Jacksonville
6 So. 2d 250 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1941)
Ocean Beach Hotel Company v. Town of Atlantic Beach
2 So. 2d 879 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1941)
Smith, Et Vir v. City of Arcadia
2 So. 2d 725 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1941)
Rorick v. Reconstruction Finance Corp.
198 So. 494 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1940)
Steele v. City of Waycross
10 S.E.2d 867 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1940)
Horn v. City of Miami Beach
194 So. 620 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1940)
Stowe v. Brickell
194 So. 609 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1940)
Bice v. City of Haines City
195 So. 919 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1940)
State Ex Rel. Hurner v. Culbreath
192 So. 814 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1939)
Northern Investment Corp. v. Mutual Realty Co.
174 So. 849 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1937)
McCord v. Lee
172 So. 853 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1937)
Southern Pine Co. of Georgia v. Murphy Investment Co.
171 So. 325 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
142 So. 233, 104 Fla. 1, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-sanford-v-dial-fla-1932.