La Salle & P.H.&D.R. Co. v. Donoghue

• Decision Date: 15 November 1888
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court
• Parties: LA SALLE & P. H. & D. R. CO. v. DONOGHUE, Collector.

127 Ill. 27

18 N.E. 827

LA SALLE & P. H. & D. R. CO.

v.DONOGHUE, Collector.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

November 15, 1888.

Appeal from circuit court, La Salle county; CHARLES BLANCHARD, Judge.

Bill by the La Salle & Peru Horse & Dummy Railroad Company against Timothy Donoghue, collector, to enjoin the collection of a tax on its capital stock. Complainant appeals.

Bull & Strawn, for appellant.

Moloney & Stead, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This was a bill in equity brought by the La Salle & Peru Horse & Dummy Railroad Company against the collector of taxes of the town of La Salle, in La Salle county, to enjoin the collection of a tax assessed by the state board of equalization on the capital stock of complainant for the year 1884. The complainant returned its capital stock as being of no value, but the state board assessed the capital stock at $5,000. It is claimed that the capital stock was of no value, but if that be true, and the state board committed an error of judgment in making the assessment, that affords no ground for relief in a court of equity. When the power has been conferred upon a person or a board to made an assessment, and, in the exercise of that power, a greater value has been placed on certain property than should be placed upon it, a court of equity has no power to review the action of the assessor, and correct an error of that character. The rule well established is that the action of the assessors is final, unless it can be shown that the assessment was fraudulently made, or that the property assessed was not liable to taxation, or the legislature has, in authorizing the tax, disregarded or transcended the principles of equality, or where a tax has been levied when not authorized by law. Insurance Co. v. Pollak, 75 Ill. 294. The facts presented by this record do not, in our opinion, bring the case within any of the exceptions stated above. As bearing upon the question of fraud, it was proven on the hearing that complainant sent an attorney to Springfield while the state board was in session who appeared before the committee on the assessment of capital stock of corporations, and stated to the committee that the object for which the enterprise had been incorporated had proven an entire failure; that the capital stock was of no value, and the debts of no value, except to the extent of the taxable property, which had already been assessed at its full market value. The attorney also stated that if the committee was not...