{
  "id": 1334038,
  "name": "Nevada County v. Dickey",
  "name_abbreviation": "Nevada County v. Dickey",
  "decision_date": "1900-04-28",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "160",
  "last_page": "162",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "68 Ark. 160"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "65 Ark. 155",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        609262
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/65/0155-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "49 Ark. 140",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "26 Ark. 39",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "49 Ark. 275",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "26 Ark. 39",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "49 Ark. 275",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 237,
    "char_count": 3127,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.496,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.6191700128233698e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6869234461159704
    },
    "sha256": "9bc7b73c61abf370c2a1c1b8626566665491f2c6af58d5cb437f9fe692ae9e92",
    "simhash": "1:62579b40603a8dde",
    "word_count": 550
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:45:47.755579+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Nevada County v. Dickey."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Hughes, J.,\n(after stating the facts.) We find no provision in our statute authorizing the county to refund the purchase money of lands sold by the state, the title to whieh has failed by reason of the fact that the land was forfeited to the state upon an assessment of it for taxation whieh was void. Sections 6700, 6701, Sand. & H. Dig., do not apply to this case. The state did not warrant the title, and gave only a quitclaim deed to The land. Section 4569, San dels & Hill\u2019s Digest, same as section 4246 Mansfield\u2019s Digest, referred to in the ease of Scott v. Mills, 49 Ark. 275.\nUnder a quitclaim deed a grantee cannot recover the purchase money, upon failure of title. 3 Kerr on Real Property, p. 322. It is sometimes thought that in such case the grantee has or should have strong equities to have his purchase mon-ry money refunded. While this may be so, there is no provision of law allowing it. Counties have been said to be \u201cquasi corporations possessing no power and incurring no obligations save those especially conferred or imposed by statute.\u201d Granger v. Pulaski County, 26 Ark. 39.\nThe judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the action is dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Hughes, J.,"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "W. V. Tompkins, for appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Nevada County v. Dickey.\nOpinion delivered April 28, 1900.\nCounty \u2014 Liability to Refund Purchase Money of Tax Land. \u2014 Upon failure of title of land forfeited for taxes and sold by tbe state, and eonveyed to tbe purchaser by quitclaim deed from tbe state land commissioner, tbe county, wbieb received 6\u00dc per cent, as its share of tbe purchase money, is not liable to refund same to tbe purchaser. (Page 101.)\nAppeal from Nevada Circuit Court.\nJoel D. Conway, Judge.\nSTATEMENT BY THE COURT.\nThe appellee bought of the state, through the state land commissioner, forty acres of land at $1.25 per aere, and received a deed therefor from the land commissioner, which conveyed to him whatever interest the state had in the land. The land had been certified to the land commissioner as forfeited to the state for the nonpayment of taxes. It proved to be United States government land, not subject to taxation. Of course, the assessment for taxation and forfeiture thereon were void, and no title passed to the appellee by virtue of the sale of the tract to him by the land commissioner. The appellee filed in the county court of Nevada county his claim for $30, 60 per cent, of the amount of the purchase money paid for the land, which, under the statute, went to the county. The county court refused to allow the claim, from which he appealed to the circuit court, whieh allowed the claim, and the county appealed to this court.\nW. V. Tompkins, for appellant.\nSand. & H. Digest, \u00a7 4569, authorizes only a quitclaim deed. 49 Ark. 275. Under a quitclaim deed the grantee has no remedy against the grantor for failure. 3 Kerr, Real Prop. 2322. This case does not fall within Sand. & H. Dig., \u00a7 6700, requiring taxes erroneously paid to be refunded. Counties are quasi corporations of limited powers, and are not liable beyond these by any implication. 26 Ark. 39; 49 Ark. 140. Appellee voluntarily paid the money, and can not now receive it back. 65 Ark. 155."
  },
  "file_name": "0160-01",
  "first_page_order": 178,
  "last_page_order": 180
}