Chestnut v. Harris
Supreme Court of Arkansas
64 Ark. 580
CHESTNUT v. HARRIS
Appeal from Drew Circuit Court
Delivered: January 15, 1897.
Appeal from Drew Circuit Court.
Marcus S. Hawkins, Judge.
Z. T. Wood, for appellants.
The description, "NE. SE. sec. 24; township 13; range 7; No. of acres 40," is sufficient to identify the land, and give notice to the delinquent owner. Sand. & H. Dig., § 6625.
Wells & Williamson, for appellees.
The description of the lands in the assessment list, and also in the notice of sale of delinquent lands, was too vague. 59 Ark. 460; 43 N.Y. 107; 18 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law, pp. 278, 279 and 280. In order for a local usage of description to be binding on the parties, its establishment and notoriety, and the fact that it was known to parties, and that they contracted with reference thereto, must appear. Clark, Cont. 582, 583; 26 Minn. 212. Nor has chancery the power to correct a defective description in a tax deed. 84 Ala. 208; S.C. 4 South. 22.
[Opinion of the court by Justice BURRILL B. BATTLE.]
This work is in the public domain in the U.S. because it is an edict of a government, local or foreign. See § 313.6(C)(2) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Such documents include "legislative enactments, judicial decisions, administrative rulings, public ordinances, or similar types of official legal materials" as well as "any translation prepared by a government employee acting within the course of his or her official duties."
These do not include works of the Organization of American States, United Nations, or any of the UN specialized agencies. See Compendium III § 313.6(C)(2) and 17 U.S.C. 104(b)(5).
A non-American governmental edict may still be copyrighted outside the U.S. Similar to {{PD-in-USGov}}, the above U.S. Copyright Office Practice does not prevent U.S. states or localities from holding copyright abroad, depending on foreign copyright laws and regulations.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse