With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". of contract or constitutionality of Minn.Stat. § 272.02, subd. 38(b), arguments before the tax court and that the court did not address either issue. Accordingly, we decline to consider Crossroads’ freedom of contract argument and its argument that Minn.Stat. § 272.02, subd. 38(b), violates the Minnesota Constitution. Affirmed. 1 . Minnesota Statutes § 278.03, subd. 1, provides that a petitioner may apply to the court for permission to continue prosecution of the appeals petition without paying the tax when (1) the proposed review is to be taken in good faith; (2) there is probable cause to believe that the property may be held exempt; and (3) it would work a hardship upon petitioner to pay the taxes due. 2 . Because Cr rancis Xavier Female Acad., 233 Ill. 26, 84 N.E. 55-57 (1908) (<HOLDING>). PAGE, Justice (concurring). While I concur in

A: holding that the junior mortgagee had no right title or interest in the real estate after the sale was confirmed in the purchaser who became title owner
B: holding that it is immaterial that the name of the owner as given in the assessment is inaccurate since no personal liability is involved the land not the owner is looked to for payment of delinquent taxes
C: holding the fact that an exempt owner who acquired legal title after date when liability for current taxes had accrued was the equitable owner did not make the exemption applicable
D: holding that the current property owner may not assert a public nuisance claim against the former owner
C.