No action for the recovery of real estate sold for the payment of taxes shall lie unless the same is brought within three years from the date when the purchaser became entitled to demand a deed therefor; but if the owner of such real estate was, at the time of such sale, under the age of 19 years or insane, he or she, his or her heirs, or legal representatives shall be allowed one year after such disability is removed to bring an action for the recovery thereof; but this section shall not apply to any action brought by the state, to cases in which the owner of the real estate sold had paid the taxes, for the payment of which such real estate was sold prior to such sale, or to cases in which the real estate sold was not, at the time of the assessment or of the sale, subject to taxation. There shall be no time limit for recovery of real estate by an owner of land who has retained possession. If the owner of land seeking to redeem has retained possession, character of possession need not be actual and peaceful, but may be constructive and scrambling and, where there is no real occupancy of land, constructive possession follows title of the original owner and may only be cut off by adverse possession of the tax purchaser for three years after the purchaser is entitled to possession.
(Acts 1935, No. 194, p. 256; Code 1940, T. 51, §295; Act 2009-508, p. 937, §1.)
Notes of Decisions
Southside Cmty. Dev. Corp. Ex Rel. Galloway v. White, 10 So. 3d 990 (Ala. 2008).
· cites it 11× “Southside moved for a judgment as a matter of law at the close of White’s case and renewed that motion at the end of its case, arguing that White had not adversely possessed the property for the requisite three years as provided in § 40-10-82, Ala.Code 1975. 2 The trial court,…”
In re Ferrouillat, 558 B.R. 938 (Bankr. S.D. Ala. 2016).
· cites it 9× “The trial court determined based on Nature Conservancy’s ore tenus evidence that it had maintained continuous possession of the property, and thus was entitled to redeem under Ala. Code § 40-10-82 , outside the three-year limitations period set out in § 40-10-120.”
Daugherty v. Rester, 645 So. 2d 1361 (Ala. 1994).
· cites it 10× “296 (1881), which was applying the statute that is now codified, as amended, at § 40-10-82, Ala.Code 1975, and not § 40-10-120, Ala.”
First Props., L.L.C. v. Bennett, 959 So. 2d 653 (Ala. Civ. App. 2006).
· cites it 3× “1993), cited by the owner, is not inconsistent with our holding; although an owner of real property sold for taxes may, under Ala.Code 1975, § 40-10-82, be entitled to a three-year period after having lost possession of a parcel of property to a tax purchaser within which to…”
Rioprop Holdings, LLC v. Compass Bank, 256 So. 3d 674 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
· cites it 10× “1988), our supreme court discussed the application of the limitations period set forth in § 40-10-82, explaining: " Code 1975, § 40-10-82, states that no action for the recovery of land sold for the payment of taxes 'shall lie unless the same is brought within three years from…”
McLeod v. White, 45 So. 3d 360 (Ala. Civ. App. 2010).
· cites it 6× ““Code 1975, § 40-10-82, does establish a ‘short statute of limitations’ for tax deed cases.”
In re Washington, 551 B.R. 644 (Bankr. M.D. Ala. 2016).
· cites it 7× “CODE § 40-10-82. However, “this statute does not begin to run until the purchaser is in adverse possession of the land and has become entitled to demand a deed to the land.”
Rabren v. Osmon, 613 So. 2d 390 (Ala. 1993).
· cites it 3× “Ala. Code 1975, § 40-10-82, establishes a ‘short statute of limitations’ for tax deed cases.”
Craig v. Willcox, 655 So. 2d 1002 (Ala. Civ. App. 1994).
· cites it 8× “This case involves the redemption of property, pursuant to Ala.Code 1975, §§ 40-10-82 and -83. Marla A.”
Wall to Wall Props. v. Cadence Bank, NA, 163 So. 3d 384 (Ala. Civ. App. 2014).
“A party may also redeem the property through the "judicial-redemption” process outlined in §§ 40-10-82 and 40-10-83, Ala.Code 1975. First Props.”
Mitchell v. Curry, 70 So. 3d 353 (Ala. Civ. App. 2011).
· cites it 2× “Code 1975), the owner has two methods of redeeming the property from that sale: `statutory redemption' (also known as `administrative redemption'), which requires the payment of specified sums of money to the probate judge of the county in which the parcel is located ( see §…”
CMC Props., LLC v. Emerald Falls, LLC, 146 So. 3d 1 (Ala. 2013).
“Code 1975), the owner has two methods of redeeming the property from that sale: ‘statutory redemption' (also known as 'administrative redemption’), which requires the payment of specified sums of money to the probate judge of the county in which the parcel is located (see §…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.