{
  "id": 5268351,
  "name": "Jacob Glos and Philip Knopf, County Clerk, etc., v. Evanston and North Cook County Building & Loan Association",
  "name_abbreviation": "Glos v. Evanston & North Cook County Building & Loan Ass'n",
  "decision_date": "1900-01-30",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "651",
  "last_page": "654",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "86 Ill. App. 651"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "86 Ill. 431",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2770404
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/86/0431-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "123 Ill. 310",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2922698
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/123/0310-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "135 Ill. 190",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2986809
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/135/0190-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 396,
    "char_count": 6967,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.525,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.770845263994211e-08,
      "percentile": 0.41226418991995284
    },
    "sha256": "8763f35e788c2a975f6672a121adae46745bd2b8f90698dda815946a40cf5b6e",
    "simhash": "1:9dd5cfd15401f814",
    "word_count": 1230
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:28:30.258939+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Jacob Glos and Philip Knopf, County Clerk, etc., v. Evanston and North Cook County Building & Loan Association."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Freeman\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nIt is conceded by appellant that appellee, as mortgagee, ivould be entitled to maintain its bill to be allowed to redeem from the tax sale, provided it had been in possession of the property, or if the land had been vacant and unoccupied. But this is not a mere bill to remove a cloud. The right to bring suit for the purpose of setting aside a tax sale is not confined to the original owner of the land, but may be exercised by a mortgagee, or by any person who can show such an interest in the estate as would have entitled him to redeem. Miller v. Cook, 135 Ill. 190 (203). It is said in that case that the constitutional right of redemption from all sales of real estate for the non-payment of taxes exists in favor of owners and persons interested in such real estate.\nWe can not agree with appellant that the bill upon its face shows no equity. While it may be that appellant could obtain a valid tax deed as against the owner, notwithstanding the failure to serve the notice required by statute upon the mortgagee, such tax deed would give nevertheless a purely technical as against a meritorious title, at least as against the mortgagee. See Miller v. Cook, supra, on p. 207, and cases there cited. In the case of Smith v. Neff, 123 Ill. 310 (316), the defense was set up by the owner, upon whom notice as to expiration of time of redemption had been served, that the notice was invalid as\" to him, because not served also upon a mortgagee, whose debt had subsequently been paid and discharged. It is there said :\n\u201c It is obvious the owners, and whoever may be included within the phrase, \u2018 persons interested in such real estate,\u2019 all come within this clause of the Constitution, and shall have the right at any time within two years to redeem any real estate from a sale for taxes or special assessments\u2014a right of which such owners and parties interested can not be deprived by any action or non-action on the part of the legislature. It is not, however, germane to the present inquiry who may be meant by \u2018 persons interested in such real\u2018estate,\u2019 as those terms are used in the Constitution, for the reason that no one is here seeking to redeem the real estate involved in this litigation from sale for taxes.\u201d\nIn the case before us, however, that is what is sought to be done, viz., to redeem, bv the bill under consideration. The Constitution declares that \u201c the right of redemption from all sales of real estate for the non-payment of taxes * * * shall exist in favor of the owners and persons interested in such real estate for a period of not less than two years from such sales thereof.\u201d The owner in the case at bar was duly served with notice and allowed the time of redemption to expire as to him. Not so, however, with the mortgagee, upon whom no notice was served. It is still entitled, we think, to maintain its right to redemption, a right conferred by the Constitution, and of which it ought not to be deprived, without an opportunity to protect itself upon proper notice.\nWe are of the opinion, however, that the tender should have been kept good by pajdng the money into court when its acceptance was refused by appellant. Crain v. McGoon, 86 Ill. 431 (434). The decree will therefore be reversed and remanded, with directions to the Circuit Court to require the tender to be made good by depositing in court, for the use of Glos, the amount found due, with interest thereon from the date of the entry of the decree, and thereupon to enter a decree not inconsistent with this opinion. Eeversed and remanded with directions.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Freeman"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Enoch J. Price, attorney for appellants.",
      "H. H. C. Miller and W. S. Oppenheim, attorneys for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Jacob Glos and Philip Knopf, County Clerk, etc., v. Evanston and North Cook County Building & Loan Association.\n1. Tax Sale\u2014Bill to Set Aside\u2014By Whom it Will Lie.\u2014The right to bring a suit for the purpose of setting aside a tax sale, is not confined to the original owner of the land, but may be exercised by a mortgagee, or by any person who can show such an interest in the estate as would have entitled him to redeem.\n3. Same\u2014Constitutional Right of Redemption.\u2014The constitutional right of redemption from all sales of real estate for the non-payment of taxes exists in favor of owners and persons interested in such real estate.\n3. Tender\u2014For Taxes Must he Kept Good.\u2014A tender of money in payment of taxes to the holder .of a tax deed, by a party filing a bill to redeem, must be kept good by paying the money into court, when its acceptance is refused.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Abner Smith, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1899.\nReversed and remanded with directions.\nOpinion filed January 30, 1900.\nStatement.\u2014This is an appeal from a decree enjoining the county clerk of Cook comity from issuing a tax deed to appellant G-los upon a tax certificate.\nThe premises upon -which the tax certificate was issued were purchased by said appellant at a sale for non-payment of an installment of a special assessment, and general taxes for the succeeding year were subsequently paid. More than ninety days preceding the expiration of the period of redemption, Glos caused notice \u00f3f the date of said expiration to be served upon one Coel, who was occupying the premises, but no notice was served upon appellee, who is the holder of certain mortgages made by said Coel, which are uncanceled of record, the debt thereby secured being still unpaid. It appears that appellee had been informed, before said period of redemption had expired, that the lot had \u25a0been sold for non-payment of such assessment and had notified Coel. The latter informed appellee\u2019s secretary that the assessment had in fact been paid, that the sale was therefore a mistake, and that he, Coel, would see that the correction was made. Appellee seems to have relied on Coel\u2019s statement, and did not discover until after the expiration of the period of redemption the true condition of affairs. Efforts to purchase Glos\u2019 interest were made without result, the latter demanding a price which appellee considers extortionate.\nA motion was made by appellant in the trial court to dissolve the preliminary injunction and denied. A general demurrer to the bill was also overruled, and appellant electing to stand by his demurrer, a decree was entered granting a perpetual injunction against the issue of a tax deed under the certificate of sale in controversy. This decree further finds that upon payment by appellee to appellant of the \u201c sum of twenty-six dollars and ninety-one cents, being the full sum to which said Glos is entitled, the complainant is entitled to the relief as prayed; \u201d and it is recited that the complainant now in open court tenders and offers to said Glos the said sum of $26.91, which said Glos declines to receive and refuses to accept, denying the right of the complainant to redeem said property.\nEnoch J. Price, attorney for appellants.\nH. H. C. Miller and W. S. Oppenheim, attorneys for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0651-01",
  "first_page_order": 659,
  "last_page_order": 662
}
