Brady v. Dowden
Cases that cite this one
9 later published cases cite this decision.
- Sitton v. Hernstadt (Okla. 1923)
- Wall v. Kaighn (Utah 1914)
- Lewis v. Blackburn (Or. 1902)
- Eustis v. City of Henrietta (Tex. 1897)
- Z. Russ & Sons Co. v. Crichton (Cal. 1897)
- Gwynn v. Dierssen (Cal. 1894)
- City of San Luis Obispo v. Pettit (Cal. 1891)
- Pearson v. Creed (Cal. 1889)
- Bosworth v. Webster (Cal. 1883)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The recital in the deed, “ That the said property was assessed for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 1878, for city taxes, at eight dollars and ten cents to unknown owners, and to all owners and claimants, known and unknown,” makes it void, under the decisions of this Court in Grotefend v. Ultz, 53 Cal. 666, and Grimm v. O'Connell, 54 id. 522. If the name of the owner was known it should have been assessed to him. If not, it should have been assessed to unknown owners. (Pol. Code, § 3636.)
In this case the Assessor, according to the recital in the deed, did not follow this plain and simple direction, but assessed the property to owners and claimants known, without naming them. As we construe the opinion of the Court in Grimm v. O’Connell, 54 Cal. 522; the plaintiff is concluded by the recital in his deed, as to whom the property was assessed. He could not be permitted to prove aliwade that the property was not assessed as therein recited.
Judgment affirmed.
Myrick, J., and Thornton, J., concurred.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.