In any action respecting lands claimed to have been forfeited to the state for taxes, no cause of action or defense asserted by any party adversely to the state, or its successor in interest, based in whole or in part upon any ground other than the claim that the land was tax exempt or that the taxes have been paid, shall be entertained unless the party asserting the same shall, at the time of filing the party's complaint or answer, as the case may be, deposit with the court administrator in which the action is pending, for the use of the state and its successor in interest, if any, as their interests may appear, a sum equal to the amount of the taxes and special assessments, with interest, penalties, and costs thereon, accrued against the land at the time of forfeiture, together with interest at the rate of four percent per annum on such sum from the date of forfeiture to the date of filing the complaint or answer. If the forfeiture of the land to the state be invalidated by the court's decision, the court shall order the sum to be applied on the lien to be determined in such cases as hereinafter provided. If the forfeiture be not invalidated by the decision, the court shall order the sum returned to the depositor.
Notes of Decisions
Hamborg v. Cnty. of Hennepin, 498 N.W.2d 486 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 6× “” Minn.Stat. § 284.10 (1990) requires persons challenging a tax forfeiture to deposit the full amount of delinquent taxes before bringing a claim in court; failure to make such payment results in automatic dismissal.”
Application of Thielke, 374 N.W.2d 184 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 4× “Did the trial court have jurisdiction to hear this case under Minn.Stat. § 284.10 (1976)? 2. Did the respondents receive adequate notice regarding the tax forfeiture? ANALYSIS 1.”
State v. Child, 49 N.W.2d 638 (Minn. 1951).
· cites it 2× “A hearing on the motion was held on the same day, and the land commissioner made the objection that appellants had no right to appear and contest the validity of the tax title in the state because they had not paid the taxes as required by § 284.10. With the permission of the…”
Bonley v. Rickmire, 6 N.W.2d 245 (Minn. 1942).
· cites it 2× “1941, § 284.10 (Mason St. 1940 Supp. § 2190-4).”
Cobb v. City of Willmar, 242 N.W.2d 83 (Minn. 1976).
“1(a), or plaintiff’s failure to tender payment of delinquent taxes prior to bringing suit, § 284.10. Defendants raised both of these issues in their answer, but the trial court apparently did not rule on them.”
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.