Overview
Case summary
The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Claims' judgment in favor of the remaindermen of a property sold for taxes during the Civil War. The Court held that because the claimants were the rightful owners of the remainder interest, did not participate in the tax sale redemption/repurchase, and were not legally bound by the actions of the life tenant who had adhered to the rebellion, they were entitled to the benefits of the remediable statute of 1891.
Abstract
The Supreme Court affirmed judgment for remaindermen whose property was sold for taxes during the Civil War. The remaindermen, as rightful owners of the remainder interest, did not participate in the tax sale redemption or repurchase and were not bound by the life tenant's actions during the rebellion. They were thus entitled to benefits under the remediable statute of 1891.
Opinion of the court
opinionMr. Justice Shiras
- Claimants were owners of the remainder in fee.
- Claimants did not purchase or redeem the land.
- Claimants are not held by any necessary intendment of law to have been represented by the actual purchaser (the life tenant).
Procedural posture
Legal categories
Case record
Issues & holdings
Holdings of the court
Timeline
No timeline recorded.
Facts & evidence
Incident
Key facts
6 facts- Block 91 in Beaufort was sold by the United States direct tax commissioner to satisfy a tax assessment.
- The property was bid in by the United States.
- T. E. S. Elliott held a life estate in the property, with the claimants (his children) holding the remainder in fee.
- T. E. S. Elliott adhered to the rebellion during the Civil War.
- The property was later resold at public auction to T. E. S. Elliott.
- Claimants never repurchased or redeemed the property from the United States.
Authorities
Legal principles applied
- Statutory interpretation of the 1891 remediable statute