# Grisso v. Ellis

> Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 9, 1944 · 194 Okla. 506

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3817266

## Case

- **Full name:** GRISSO v. ELLIS Et Al.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Oklahoma
- **Decided:** May 9, 1944
- **Citations:** 194 Okla. 506; 153 P.2d 104; 1944 OK 208; 1944 Okla. LEXIS 516
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Riley
- **Judges:** Riley, Corn, Bayless, Welch, Hurst, Arnold, Gibson, Osborn, Davison
- **Cited by:** 4 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3817266

## Opinion text

RILEY, J.
W. E. Grisso, record owner of land in Grady county, sought to quiet title to his lands and by the judgment failed.
Defendants’ title to the lands rests -upon a resale tax deed, dated May 17, 1938, executed and delivered to the chairman of the board of county commissioners of Grady county and a commissioner’s deed executed and delivered to Lucian Erwin on September 6, 1938, and mesne conveyances to Johnson et al.
The land was advertised and sold for taxes due and delinquent for the years 1932-1936, inclusive, in the total amount of $268.55.
Three-fourths of the 1937 ad valorem taxes were not included in the notice of sale, but the record before us shows that the total of all taxes, penalties, interest, and. costs shown by the county treasurer’s record for which the land was sold was in fact $3.22 less than the sum for which the land was advertised and sold. However, the amount of costs, for advertisement was not known to the sole witness, the county treasurer, who testified at the instance of plaintiff. It is possible that the discrepancy of $3.22 was the cost of publication of notice of sale. The trial court sustained a demurrer to the evidence of plaintiff, quieting title in defendants, and awarded possession accordingly, together with judgment for rental value, based on evidence, in the sum of $116.67 during; the period of plaintiff’s withholding possession.
Our decision herein is based upon our' decision in Bramble et al. v. Caywood, 193 Okla. 668 , 146 P. 2d 587 , and the applicable part of the syllabus in that, case is adopted herein.
Affirmed.
CORN, C. J., and BAYLESS, WELCH", HURST, and ARNOLD, JJ., concur. GIBSON, V.C.J., and. OSBORN and DAVISON, JJ., dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3817266. Public record. Not legal advice.