Cited by

Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373, 377-78 , 17 N.W.

be deemed mandatory.” And further: “All statutory provisions, not on their face merely permissory or discretionary, are intended to be obeyed, or else they would never have been enacted, and therefore they come to the several officers who are to act under them as commands.” Applying this general rule are Bowen v. City of Minneapolis, 47 Minn. 115 , , 28 A. S. R. 333; Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , , ; State ex rel.

Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , , .

Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , 17 N.W.

1932, 1934) § 7998; Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , , ; Murray v. Zook, 205 Ind.

The statute in this respect (section 14, chapter 230, p. 318, Laws 1905), is to be held directory and not mandatory under the rule ’ announced in Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , , , namely: “Where the provision of a statute as to the time when an act shall be done is intended merely for the guidance of public officers, so as to insure the orderly and prompt performance of public business, a disregard of which cannot *39 injuriously affect the rights of parties inter

That similar regulations are merely directory was held in Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , , .

Counsel for appellant concedes that the cases are identical, but urges that a similar certificate issued in Chisago county under the same forfeited tax law was upheld in Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , , , and that the rights of his client should, since he acquired them before the Davis decision, be determined by the rule in the Dawson case.

One objection is that the certified copy of the board of commissioners’ resolution designating the newspaper for the publication of the delinquent tax list, which is jurisdictional (Eastman v. Linn, 26 Minn. 215 , ; Merriman v. Knight, 43 Minn. 493 , ; Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , , ), was dated the thirteenth of January.

Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , , ; Faribault Waterworks Co. v. County of Rice, 44 Minn. 12 , .

Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , , ; Coffin v. Estes, 32 Minn. 367 , ; County of Chisago v. St.

Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , , ; Banning v. McManus, 51 Minn. 289 , ; State v. West Duluth Land Co., 75 Minn. 456 , ; State v. Meehan, 92 Minn. 283 , .

That the statute is mandatory, and in consequence jurisdictional, was held in Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373, 382 , , , in which the court said: “The provisions, so far as time is concerned, which are designed for his [the taxpayer’s] benefit and to prevent any unjust sacrifice of his property, are: First, the two-weeks’ publication of the list and notice of application for judgment, so that he may h

See Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373, 381 , , and ; Banning v. McManus, 51 Minn. 289 , .

Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , , and .

Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , ( 17 N. W. Rep.

Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , ( 17 N. W. Rep.

778 ;) Kidd v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373, 381 , ( 17 N. W. Rep.

While, as has been suggested in Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , ( 17 N. W. Rep.

Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , ( 17 N. W. Rep.

Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373, 381 , ( 17 N. W. Rep.

Under the principle of construction laid down in Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , ( 17 N. W. Rep.

As held in Kipp v. Dawson, 31 Minn. 373 , the effect of thus wrongfully including it was the same as if there had been an error in computing the amount of the taxes proper to be included in the list and judgment.