Washington University v. Baumann

• Decision Date: 30 July 1937
• Docket Number: No. 33803.,33803.
• Citation: 108 S.W.2d 403
• Parties: THE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY v. W.F. BAUMANN, Collector of the City of St. Louis, Appellant.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

108 S.W.2d 403

THE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY v. W.F. BAUMANN, Collector of the City of St. Louis, Appellant.

No. 33803.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

Court en Banc, July 30, 1937.

Appeal from Circuit Court of City of St. Louis — Hon. Janes F. Green, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Charles M. Hay, J.W. McAfee and John G. Burkhardt for appellant.

(1) Plaintiff had an adequate remedy for the correction of any fraud or wrong in its assessment by timely appeal to the local board of equalization and, if necessary, to the State Tax Commission, and, in the absence of such proceedings, the court of equity has no jurisdiction to determine the matter. First Trust Co. v. Wells, 23 S.W. (2d) 108; State ex rel. v. Jones, 238 Mo. 267, 41 S.W. (2d) 393; Brinkerhoff-Faris Trust & Savs. Co. v. Hill, 323 Mo. 180, 19 S.W. (2d) 746, reversed on other grounds, 281 U.S. 673, 74 L. Ed. 1107. (2) The questions involved in this matter are within the jurisdiction of the agencies comprising the tax assessment machinery and must be determined by those agents. Secs. 9854, 9855, 14706, 14709, 14712, R.S. 1929; State ex rel. v. Gehner, 11 S.W. (2d) 34; Commonwealth v. Churchill, 131 Ky. 256, 115 S.W. 189. (3) The property in question is under the general law subject to assessment and the question of whether plaintiff is entitled to a contractual exemption must be annually considered by the assessing agencies and determined under the facts and circumstances existing at each assessment period. Washington University v. Rouse, 8 Wall. 439, 75 U.S. 439, 19 L. Ed. 499. (4) The action of the assessor in assessing defendant's property is quasi-judicial and not subject to collateral attack. State ex rel. Arnold v. McCune, 252 S.W. 657; State ex rel. v. Hoyt, 123 Mo. 348, 27 S.W. 382. (5) Failure of plaintiff to take timely appeal from assessment in question to local board of equalization and, if necessary, State Tax Commission, is laches and bars plaintiff from equitable relief. Brinkerhoff-Faris Co. v. Hill, 323 Mo. 180, 19 S.W. (2d) 749.

Charles P. Williams for respondent.

(1) The decisions of the United States Supreme Court establish the grant in the charter of incorporation as a franchise and an irrefutable contract. Washington Univ. v. Rowse, 8 Wall. 439; Home of the Friendless v. Rowse, 8 Wall. 430; Northwestern University v. Illinois, 9 Otto, 309; In re Delaware Railroad Co., 18 Wall. 206; Wilmington & Raleigh Railroad Co. v. Reid, 13 Wall. 264; Pacific Railroad Co. v. Maguire, 20 Wall. 36; Humphrey v. Pegues, 16 Wall. 244; Farrington v. Tennessee, 95 U.S. 679; St. Anna's Asylum v. New Orleans, 15 Otto, 362; Wright v. Georgia Railroad & Banking Co., 216 U.S. 420; Wright v. Central of Georgia Rys., 236 U.S. 674; Wright v. L. & N. Ry. Co., 236 U.S. 687; Central of Georgia Rys. v. Wright, 248 U.S. 525, 250 U.S. 519. (2) The Missouri decisions support the franchise asserted. State ex rel. v. Trustees of Westminster College, 175 Mo. 52; St. Vincent's College v. Schaefer, 104 Mo. 267; Mechanics Bank v. City of Kansas, 73 Mo. 555; State ex rel. v. Hannibal & St. J. Ry. Co., 101 Mo. 136; State ex rel. v. Trustee of Wm. Jewell College, 234 Mo. 299; Turnverein v. Hagerman, 232 Mo. 693. (3) The general statutes relating to taxation do not apply. State ex rel. v. St. Joseph Convent, 116 Mo. 575. (4) The Missouri cases uphold the remedy by injunction. Mechanics Bank v. City of Kansas, 73 Mo. 555; Valle v. Ziegler, 84 Mo. 214; North St. Louis Gymnastic Society v. Hudson, 12 Mo. App. 342, 85 Mo. 32; Exposition Driving Park v. Kansas City, 174 Mo. 425; Turnverein v. Hagerman, 232 Mo. 693. (5) The right to injunction is supported by general authorities. 1 High on Injunctions (4 Ed.), sec. 530, p. 504; 61 C.J., sec. 1426, p. 1081; Grisard v. Rose Lawn Cemetery Assn., 19 Pac. 766; Walker v. Hays, 127 Okla. 124; Croop v. Walton, 199 Ind. 265; Smith v. Osburn, 53 Iowa, 474; Nashville Labor Temple v. Nashville, 243 S.W. 78; Ryan v. Louisville, 133 Ky. 718; Ill. Central Railroad Co. v. Hodges, 113 Ill. 325; Pittsburgh A. & M. Ry. Co. v. Stowe Township, 252 Pa. 155; Wytheville v. Johnson, 108 Va. 589; Staunton v. Mary Baldwin Seminary, 39 S.E. 596; Elmhurst Fire Co. v. New York, 213 N.Y. 91; People ex rel. v. Tax Commission, 246 N.Y. 326; Portland University v. Multnomah County, 50 Pac. 534; National Metal Box Co. v. Readsboro, 111 Atl. 388; State ex rel. v. Hannibal & St. J. Ry. Co., 97 Mo. 355; Cooley on Taxation (4 Ed.), sec. 1058. (6) The local assessors cannot repeal the franchise. Washington University v. Rowse, 8 Wall. 440; Given v. Wright, 117 U.S. 656. (7) This suit was based upon and set up the former decree as a cause of action. North St. Louis Gymnastic Society v. Hagerman, 232 Mo. 693; Kansas City Exposition Driving Park v. Kansas City, 174 Mo. 425; 1 Freeman on Judgments (5 Ed.), p. 1801; St. Louis Charter of 1876, Art. V, Sec. 34; Freeman on Judgments (5 Ed.), pp. 1081, 1095; St. Louis v. United Rys. Co., 263 Mo. 423; New Orleans v. Citizens Bank, 167 U.S. 371. (8) One of the questions involved is the alleged excess of property which is outside the jurisdiction of the State Tax Commission. (9) The practical situation; the rule as to the adequate remedy at law. Woodward v. Woodward, 148 Mo. 241; Pomeroy's Equity Jurisprudence (3 Ed.), sec. 279; Pocoke v. Peterson, 256 Mo. 519; New York Life Ins. Co. v. Cobb, 219 Mo. App. 619; 21 C.J., sec. 31, p. 53. (10) The true meaning of the Brinkerhoff-Faris Trust Co. case. Brinkerhoff-Faris Trust Co. v. Hill, 323 Mo. 183; State ex rel. v. Caulfield, 62 S.W. 823. (11) The remedy alleged to be afforded by the Tax Commission Law is not plain and obvious. (12) The remedy alleged to be afforded by the Tax Commission Law is not complete. (13) The remedy alleged to be afforded by the Tax Commission Law is not adequate to meet our situation. Root v. Woolworth, 150 U.S. 401.

ELLISON, J.

This is an appeal by the Collector of the City of St. Louis from a decree of the circuit court of that city granting the respondent, The Washington University, a perpetual injunction restraining him and his subordinates from seizing, offering for sale, or selling some sixty-two lots or parcels of its real estate for State, city and school taxes aggregating $183,003.77, assessed June 1, 1931, and due December 31, 1932, and from otherwise attempting to collect said taxes, on the ground that the corporate charter of the University exempts all its property from taxation. The injunction suit was originally brought against Edmond Koeln, the then collector of St. Louis. Since this appeal was lodged here his successor in office, W.F. Baumann, has been substituted as appellant. We shall refer to him as the Collector and to the respondent as the University.

The University's petition below alleged and the evidence showed that it was incorporated on February 22, 1853, under the name "the Eliot seminary" by special act of the General Assembly, Laws 18523, page 290, section 1 of which provided that: "(the named corporators) and their associates and successors are hereby constituted a body corporate and politic, by the name of `the Eliot seminary,' and by that name shall have perpetual succession, and be capable of taking and holding by gift, grant, devise or otherwise, and conveying, leasing, or otherwise disposing of any estate, real, personal or mixed, annuities, endowments, franchises and other hereditaments which may conduce to the support of said seminary, or to the promotion of its objects; all property of said corporation shall be exempt from taxation, and the sixth, seventh and eighth sections of the first article of the act concerning corporations, approved March 19, 1845, shall not apply to this corporation." (Italics ours.)

The seventh section of the first article of the act concerning corporations (R.S. 1845, Chap. 34, p. 232) from the application of which the University was exempted by the above special act, provided that the charter of every corporation thereafter granted by the Legislature should be subject to alteration, suspension and repeal in the discretion of the Legislature. The State Constitution of 1820, in force at that time, imposed no limitations on the legislative power to enact local or special laws, or laws granting exemption from taxation.

The aforesaid special Act of 1853 was amended by Laws 1857, page 610. Section 1 of the latter act provided: "The name of the corporation now know as `The Eliot Seminary,' shall henceforth be `The Washington University,' by which name the said corporation shall have, hold and enjoy all the property, rights, franchises, endowments, immunities and privileges conferred upon and belonging to the Eliot Seminary." Section 2 of the act forbade instruction either sectarian in religion or party in politics in any department of the University; and likewise prohibited the application of such tests in the selection of the faculty and officers or the admission of students, or for any purpose whatever. The University accepted and ever since has operated under that amended charter.

Eight years later the State Constitution of 1865 was adopted. Section 27, Article IV thereof provided: "The general assembly shall not pass special laws ... exempting any property of any named person or corporation from taxation." And Section 16 of Article XI declared: "No property, real or personal, shall be exempt from taxation, except such as may be used exclusively for public schools, and such as may belong to the United States, to this State, to counties, or to municipal corporations, within this State."

Shortly following the adoption of this (then) new Constitution, in 1866 certain real estate of the University was assessed for taxation, and Edward S. Rowse, collector of the revenue of St. Louis County, took steps to collect the taxes. The University brought a suit to enjoin him therefrom on the same ground urged in the instant suit, namely, that by virtue of its charter the real estate was exempt from taxation. The...