Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448(Ga. L. 1877, p. 125, §§ 1-4; Code 1882, §§ 3656a, 3656c, 3656d, 3656e; Civil Code 1895, §§ 732, 734, 735, 736, 738; Ga. L. 1900, p. 81, §§ 1, 2; Ga. L. 1901, p. 23, § 1; Ga. L. 1904, p. 52, § 1; Ga. L. 1906, p. 32, § 1; Civil Code 1910, §§ 879, 881, 882, 883, 885, 911, 912; Code 1933, §§ 92-4401, 92-4403, 92-4404, 92-4405, 92-4407, 92-4408, 92-4409; Ga. L. 1939, p. 226, § 1; Code 1933, § 91A-1511, enacted by Ga. L. 1978, p. 309, § 2; Ga. L. 1983, p. 884, § 3-35.)
- This Code section is partially derived from the decision in Johnson v. Phillips & Co., 89 Ga. 286, 15 S.E. 368 (1892).
- Words "time, place, and manner of sale" do not embrace the newspaper in which the sale is to be advertised. Consequently, the statute does not require that sales for municipal taxes shall be advertised in the same newspaper in which the sheriff's sales for city and county taxes are advertised. Bacon v. Mayor of Savannah, 86 Ga. 301, 12 S.E. 580 (1890); Scheurman v. City of Columbus, 106 Ga. 34, 31 S.E. 787 (1898).
- Even if the documents from the sheriff's office notifying a property owner of a tax sale were not properly authenticated, that would not render the tax sale or the deed therefrom void; the owner's claim that a buyer failed to properly provide notice of foreclosure of the owner's right of redemption because the notification was delivered by a private process server rather than the sheriff had been rejected. Davis v. Harpagon Co., LLC, 281 Ga. 250, 637 S.E.2d 1 (2006).
- Under a provision in a city charter declaring that tax sales shall be advertised for 30 days, one insertion of the advertisement of such a sale in each calendar week during the period of 30 days immediately preceding the day of sale will suffice, provided the first insertion appeared at least 30 days before the sale. Montford v. Allen, 111 Ga. 18, 36 S.E. 305 (1900).
- Publication of the advertisement of a marshal's sale for taxes in a newspaper appearing on Sunday is not legal, and the sale thereunder passes no title. Sawyer v. Cargile, 72 Ga. 290 (1884).
- As regards the effect of a failure properly to advertise, there is a distinction to be drawn between tax sales had in pursuance of the general law of the state and those had in pursuance of a provision in a municipal charter. In the former, the law in reference to notice is merely directory, and purchasers at such sales, if themselves without fault, will be protected; whereas a provision of a city charter prescribing the time for giving notice of a municipal tax sale must be strictly complied with, or the sale will be void even as against an innocent purchaser. Montford v. Allen, 111 Ga. 18, 36 S.E. 305 (1900).
- When, under a city charter, it is the duty of the marshal to collect executions for taxes and conduct sales thereunder, the city clerk has no authority to postpone a tax sale or grant indulgence to the defendant in the tax execution, the taxpayer would rely on the execution at the taxpayer's peril, and such an arrangement would not invalidate the sale, even if made. Montford v. Allen, 111 Ga. 18, 36 S.E. 305 (1900).
- One seeking relief from excessive tax levies, but admitting, either expressly or by necessary implication, that one owes part of the tax covered by such executions, must pay or offer to pay the amount of the taxes admitted to be due, in order to obtain the relief sought; this rule also applies to those seeking relief from excessive levies by municipal authorities. Lowe v. City of Atlanta, 191 Ga. 76, 11 S.E.2d 891 (1940).
- When city was authorized to pave the city's streets and assess costs of such paving against abutting property, the law must be read into the city's charter and the city may bid upon and purchase such property when execution, levy, and sale were necessary to collect the assessments. City of Valdosta v. Ousley, 175 Ga. 775, 166 S.E. 195 (1932).
- Buyer provided sufficient evidence that a tax sale took place as the tax sale deed was appropriately signed by the sheriff; a valid fiere facias (fi fa) was issued by the county as the tax commissioner appropriately attached the commissioner's signature to the fi fa. Davis v. Harpagon Co., LLC, 281 Ga. 250, 637 S.E.2d 1 (2006).
- Title acquired by the city at a tax sale is the same as that any individual would have obtained; that is, the city obtains title subject to the lien of the special assessment. The city is authorized to convey no better title than it holds. The city may not by merely reselling the property divest the lien of the assessment for to allow this would provide a method for vitiating the provision making this lien coequal with the lien of other taxes. Steele v. City of Waycross, 190 Ga. 816, 10 S.E.2d 867 (1940).
- Realty which has been levied upon and sold under a fi. fa. for municipal paving may be redeemed by the owner, the owner's grantee in a security deed, or a mortgagee, as well as others having an interest in the property, upon paying or tendering to pay to the purchaser, within 12 months, the purchase price, with a premium of 10 percent from the date of the sale to the date of the offer to redeem. Hopkins v. Chatham Phoenix Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 174 Ga. 136, 162 S.E. 521 (1932).
- Special master did not err in finding that a fact question remained as to whether a proper levy of the property occurred in accordance with O.C.G.A. § 9-13-12 as deposition testimony from representatives of the sheriff's office raised significant questions as to whether required entries of the levy, including the necessary description of the property, were appropriately made on the writ of execution, or fiere facias, and in the sheriff's records; on the other hand, however, the buyer presented a tax sale deed that recited that the formalities required for a levy had been honored, thereby providing evidence that some seizure of the property had occurred. Davis v. Harpagon Co., LLC, 281 Ga. 250, 637 S.E.2d 1 (2006).
- It would not be legal for a city official to bid for the official's own private use at public sales conducted by the city as the city is itself authorized to make purchases in the city's own behalf. 1952-53 Op. Att'y Gen. p. 386.
- 72 Am. Jur. 2d, State and Local Taxation, §§ 807, 820, 833, 857.
- 64A C.J.S., Municipal Corporations, § 2430 et seq. 85 C.J.S., Taxation, §§ 1221 et seq., 1539 et seq.
- Tax deed and recitals therein as evidence of regularity of tax proceedings as to advertising and notice of sale, and as to time, manner, and place of sale, 30 A.L.R. 8; 88 A.L.R. 264.
Total Results: 1
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2006-10-16
Citation: 637 S.E.2d 1, 281 Ga. 250, 2006 Fulton County D. Rep. 3179, 2006 Ga. LEXIS 838
Snippet: Palmer, 49 Ga.App. 540, 176 S.E. 697 (1934); OCGA § 48-5-359. This conflicting evidence created a question