PINK YOUNG
v.
LENA E. EWING, A WIDOW
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Pink Young appealed an ejectment judgment in favor of Lena E. Ewing to recover a Florida lot. The appellant homeowner contested the State's acquisition of title under the Murphy Act, claiming a ten-year tax redemption period applied. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's judgment for the plaintiff, finding the State obtained title directly under the statute rather than through tax deed procedures.
The court affirmed that the State's title vested directly under Section 9 of Chapter 18296 (the Murphy Act), not through tax certificate purchase and tax deed procedures. Therefore, the ten-year redemption period under Section 11 of the Act did not apply, and the plaintiff's ejectment suit was properly decided in her favor.
“Section 11 of the Act, supra, provides that if tax certificates on a homestead are purchased under the terms of the Act by any person or persons, or corporation, not the owner of the land, then the purchaser thereof at the expiration of ten years shall have a right to apply for a tax deed.”
Establishes the statutory condition for the ten-year redemption period—it applies only to third-party purchasers of tax certificates, not direct state acquisitions.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLena E. Ewing filed an ejectment suit to recover Lot 30 in Brevard County, Florida. Ewing presented a deed (No. 145) issued by the State of Florida th…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Ejectment Suit cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellee, Lena E. Ewing, filed an ejectment suit in the Circuit Court of Brevard County, Florida, to recover the title and possession of Lot 30, as described in Deed Book 84, page 120, Metcalf’s unrecorded Plat of Wright Brothers’ Tract, Section 3, Tp. 28, South Range 37 East. Plaintiff below offered in evidence deed No. 145 issued by the State of Florida through the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund of the State of Florida to the plaintiff under date of November 18, 1940. Plaintiff offered testimony to show that the defendants below were in possession of the land described in the declaration and the aforesaid deed. A motion was made by the plaintiff for a directed verdict.
Counsel for the defendant below (appellants here) contended that the motion should be denied because Section 11 of Chapter 18296, Acts of 1937, Laws of Florida, commonly known as the Murphy Act, was controlling' and that the appellants had a period of ten years in which to pay the taxes on the land, which was admitted to be the homestead of the appellants. Section 11 of the Act, supra, provides that if tax certificates on a homestead are puurchased under the terms of the Act by any person or persons, or corporation, not the owner of the land, then the purchaser thereof at thé expiration of -'ten'‘years' shall have a right to apply for a tax deed. The State of Florida did not purchase the tax certificates, neither did it apply for a tax deed under the provisions of the Act, but the title to the land passed to the State of Florida *355under the several provisions of Section 9 of Chapter 18296, supra. See State ex rel. Hurner v. Culbreath, 140 Fla. 634, 192 So. 814. The constitutionality of the statute vesting the title to said lands was sustained therein. We are unable to find error in the record and the judgment for the plaintiff below accordingly is hereby affirmed.
It is so ordered.
BROWN, C. J., TERRELL, and THOMAS, JJ., concur.