Boyer v. Gelhaus

HALL, J.

This is an action to quiet title to certain real property, situate in the city and county of San Francisco, brought by appellant, who bases her title upon a certificate of sale to the state for delinquent taxes and a tax deed executed on behalf of the state to appellant’s predecessor in interest, F. J. Ghiselli.

The respondents, Gelhaus, filed an answer denying the allegations of ownership by plaintiff and a cross-complaint, in which, among other things, they set up that they were in possession of the real property claimed by plaintiff, and were the owners thereof, and prayed for a decree affirmatively quieting their title as against appellant.

The court found that appellant was not the owner of the property in suit, and that respondents Gelhaus were, and entered a judgment accordingly quieting the title of respondents Gelhaus as against the claim of plaintiff.

The appeal by plaintiff is from this judgment.'

[322]

The property in question was sold to the state in 1898 for the second installment of unpaid and delinquent taxes levied against the property in 1897.

Subsequently, on December 31, 1898, the property was redeemed from such sale, by the Hibernia Savings and Loan Society, a mortgagee thereof, by the payment to the county treasurer of the amount required for redemption, as certified by the county auditor and the words “Redeemed December 31st, 1898,” were stamped on the assessment-roll for the year 1898.

Subsequently, on the first day of July, 1899, the tax collector sold the property to the state as for the nonpayment of the second installment of taxes for the year 1898, and subsequently, on the fifth day of July, 1904, issued to the state a deed therefor. This deed was introduced in evidence by plaintiff, and is in the usual form. Appellant deraigns her title through this deed.

The defendants, Gelhaus, at the beginning of the action and for some time prior thereto were in possession of the property, claiming under a deed from the administrator of the estate of John McDonald, dated April 3, 1904.

The defendants introduced in evidence a duly certified copy of the recorded certificate of redemption given by the county auditor in pursuance of section 3817 of the Political Code. This certificate contained a statement of the amount of delinquent taxes for the year 1897 for which the property was first sold to the state and the interest and the penalty thereon, and gave the total amount necessary to redeem as $9.86. The statement of the auditor contained no statement of any other taxes that were a lien upon the property at the time said taxes became delinquent, nor of any subsequent tax.