1. Section 205 of the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act of
1940, as amended, tolls the running of the time granted under state
law to redeem land sold or forfeited for taxes for so long as the
owner was in military service after October 6, 1942, and gives him
a period in which to redeem after his discharge equal to that
portion of the state statutory period which did not run because it
was suspended by this provision of the Federal Act. P.
333 U. S. 3.
2. It is not limited to cases where the state law provides for
transfer of title to a purchaser at a tax sale subject to
defeasance by redemption, but applies as well to cases in which the
tax sale results in the issuance of a certificate entitling the
holder to apply for a tax deed after the lapse of a specified time.
Pp.
333 U. S. 3-4.
3. It applies to all kinds of land, and is not limited by §
500 to "real property owned and occupied for dwelling,
professional, business, or agricultural purposes." Pp.
333 U. S. 4-6.
4. The Act must be read with an eye friendly to those who
dropped their affairs to answer their country's call. P.
333 U. S. 6.
159 Fla. 122, 31 So. 2d 155, reversed.
The Supreme Court of Florida affirmed a judgment denying relief
under § 205 of the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act of
1940, as amended. 159 Fla. 122, 31 So. 2d 155. This Court granted
certiorari. 332 U.S. 814.
Reversed, p.
333 U. S. 6.
Page 333 U. S. 2
MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS delivered the opinion of the Court.
Section 205 of the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act of
1940, 54 Stat. 1178, as amended, 56 Stat. 769, 770, 50
U.S.C.App.Supp. V § 525, provides in part that no portion of
the period of military service [
Footnote 1] which occurs after October 6, 1942, [
Footnote 2] shall be included "in
computing any period now or hereafter provided by any law for the
redemption of real property sold or forfeited to enforce any
obligation, tax, or assessment."
Petitioner owned land in Florida on which taxes became
delinquent April 1, 1940. Under Florida statutory procedure,
[
Footnote 3] the tax collector,
after notice, sells the land at public sale and issues a tax
certificate to the purchaser. At any time after two years from the
date of the certificate, the holder thereof may apply for a tax
deed. Notice is given, a public sale is had, and a tax deed is
issued. The owner may redeem the land at any time after issuance of
the certificate and before issuance of the tax deed.
Page 333 U. S. 3
In accordance with this procedure, a tax certificate on
petitioner's lands was issued August 5, 1940. Petitioner was on
active duty in the Navy from August 18, 1942, until his discharge
on December 18, 1945. Application for a tax deed was made by one
Conrod in January, 1943, and the deed issued to him on March 1,
1943. It is through him that respondents claim by mesne
conveyances.
Petitioner filed this suit in equity on March 25, 1946, seeking
to set aside the tax deed by reason of § 205 of the Soldiers'
and Sailors' Civil Relief Act. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a
judgment denying the relief, 31 So. 2d 155, on the authority of its
earlier decision in
De Loach v. Calihan, 30 So. 2d 910.
The case is here on a petition for a writ of certiorari which we
granted because the construction given to the federal Act seemed to
us not only a dubious one, but also at variance with
Illinois
Nat. Bank v. Gwinn, 390 Ill. 345, 61 N.E.2d 249.
Under Florida law, petitioner concededly could have redeemed any
time between August 5, 1940, when the certificate was issued, and
March 1, 1943, when the tax deed was issued. The provision of the
federal Act with which we are here concerned became effective
during that period -- October 6, 1942. At that time, petitioner was
in the Navy, and at once became a beneficiary of it. That means
that the running of the time granted him under Florida law to
redeem was tolled as long as he was in the military service. Since
he would have had from October 6, 1942, to March 1, 1943, to
redeem, the effect of the Act was to give him the same length of
time after his discharge for that purpose. His present action being
timely, there is thus no barrier to his recovery so far as the Act
is concerned.
Two reasons, however, are advanced against it. First, it is
argued that § 205 applies only where state law provides for
transfer of title to the purchaser subject to defeasance
Page 333 U. S. 4
by redemption. The Florida procedure is said to be not covered
by § 205, since title passes only on issuance of the deed,
which ends the period of redemption. We do not think § 205
deserves such a technical reading. The provision in question was
added in 1942 to remedy what this Court had held to be a
casus
omissus in a preceding Act. [
Footnote 4]
Ebert v. Poston, 266 U.
S. 548,
266 U. S. 554.
Its language does no compel the narrow reading that is suggested,
and the spirit of the amendment repels any such restriction. It
covers "any period . . . provided by any law for the redemption of
real property sold or forfeited," etc. We see neither in that
language nor in the legislative history of the provision any
purpose to restrict its application to cases where redemption
follows passage of title.
The second reason urged against petitioner is the one adopted by
the Supreme Court of Florida in
De Loach v. Calihan,
supra. It held that § 205 is limited by § 500. The
latter section gives added protection to a person in military
service by providing that no sale for taxes or assessments shall be
made except upon leave of court "in respect of . . . real property
owned and occupied for dwelling, professional, business, or
agricultural purposes," and by granting a given period for
redemption. [
Footnote 5]
The
Page 333 U. S. 5
Supreme Court of Florida held that § 500 describes the
class of real property on which a soldier or sailor is granted
indulgence, while § 205 indicates the period of the
indulgence. Under that view, petitioner would fail, because the
property in question does not appear to be land "owned and occupied
for dwelling, professional, business, or agricultural
purposes."
We do not, however, read the Act so restrictively. The two
sections -- 205 and 500 -- supplement each other. Section 500,
applicable to restricted types of real property, gives greater
protection than § 205. It restrains the sale for taxes or
assessments of specified types of real property except upon leave
of court, and prescribes for them a specified time within which the
right to redeem may be exercised if the property is sold. Section
205
Page 333 U. S. 6
extends in terms to all land, and only tolls the time for
redemption for the period of military service. The other
construction attributes to Congress a purpose to protect only
certain classes of real property owned by those in the armed
services. We cannot do that without drastically contracting the
language of § 205 and closing our eyes to its beneficent
purpose. But, as we indicated on another occasion, the Act must be
read with an eye friendly to those who dropped their affairs to
answer their country's call.
Boone v. Lightner,
319 U. S. 561,
319 U. S.
575.
Reversed.
[
Footnote 1]
The term is defined in § 101(2) of the Act as follows:
"For persons in active service at the date of the approval of
this Act, it shall begin with the date of approval of this Act; for
persons entering active service after the date of this Act, with
the date of entering active service. It shall terminate with the
date of discharge from active service or death while in active
service, but in no case later than the date when this Act ceases to
be in force."
[
Footnote 2]
That was the effective date of the amendment which added this
provision to § 205.
[
Footnote 3]
Fla.Stats.1941, cc.193, 194 (1941).
[
Footnote 4]
The purpose was stated as follows:
"The running of the statutory period during which real property
may be redeemed after sale to enforce any obligation, tax, or
assessment is likewise tolled during the part of such period which
occurs after the enactment of the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil
Relief Act Amendments of 1942. Although the tolling of such periods
is now within the spirit of the law, it has not been held to be
within the letter thereof (I.R. 1269 C.B., June 1922, p. 311;
Ebert v. Poston, 266 U. S. 549)."
Sen.Rep. No.1558, 77th Cong., 2d Sess., p. 4.
[
Footnote 5]
Section 500 reads in part:
"(1) The provisions of this section shall apply when any taxes
or assessments, whether general or special (other than taxes on
income), whether falling due prior to or during the period of
military service, in respect of personal property, money, or
credits, or real property owned and occupied for dwelling,
professional, business, or agricultural purposes by a person in
military service or his dependents at the commencement of his
period of military service and still so occupied by his dependents
or employees are not paid."
"(2) No sale of such property shall be made to enforce the
collection of such tax or assessment, or any proceeding or action
for such purpose commenced, except upon leave of court granted upon
application made therefor by the collector of taxes or other
officer whose duty it is to enforce the collection of taxes or
assessments. The court thereupon, unless, in its opinion, the
ability of the person in military service to pay such taxes or
assessments is not materially affected by reason of such service,
may stay such proceedings or such sale, as provided in this Act,
for a period extending not more than six months after the
termination of the period of military service of such person."
"(3) When, by law, such property may be sold or forfeited to
enforce the collection of such tax or assessment, such person in
military service shall have the right to redeem or commence an
action to redeem such property at any time not later than six
months after the termination of such service, but in no case later
than six months after the date when this Act ceases to be in force;
but this shall not be taken to shorten any period, now or hereafter
provided by the laws of any State or Territory for such
redemption."