Bengoechea v. Elmore County

• Decision Date: 15 February 1913
• Citation: 23 Idaho 397,130 P. 459
• Parties: JOE BENGOECHEA, Respondent, v. ELMORE COUNTY, Appellant
• Court: Idaho Supreme Court

130 P. 459

23 Idaho 397

JOE BENGOECHEA, Respondent, v. ELMORE COUNTY, Appellant

Supreme Court of Idaho

February 15, 1913

TAX ASSESSMENTS-GROSSLY OVER-ESTIMATED PROPERTY-RIGHT TO RECOVER TAX MONEY PAID ON OVER-ASSESSMENTS.

1. Under the provisions of sec. 1791, county commissioners have the power to refund to a taxpayer any money to which he may be entitled by reason of taxes having been paid twice on the same property, or on account of double assessments or erroneous assessment through clerical errors, or where, in the judgment of the commissioners, the assessment upon the property "was so grossly over-estimated that the same was a mistake."

2. The clause "so grossly over-estimated that the same was a mistake," contained in sec. 1791, Rev. Codes, does not have reference to an assessment made in good faith with full knowledge on the part of the assessor of the extent description, situation and probable or generally estimated value of the property, and where the assessment was made in the regular way in due course of official duty.

3. The clause "so grossly over-estimated that the same was a mistake," contained in sec. 1791 of the Rev. Codes, with reference to the refunding of tax money, was intended to authorize granting relief where the valuation has been placed upon property, as the same appears upon the assessment-roll so excessive and disproportionate to the generally estimated value of the property as to suggest in itself that some error or mistake has been made in the assessment, and may cover a case where the assessor was mistaken as to the location or distribution of the property, its extent or bounds, or was misinformed as to the value of that or similar property or had no knowledge whatever as to the probable value of the property.

APPEAL from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District for Elmore County. Hon. Edward A. Walters, Judge.

Application to the board of commissioners to have certain tax money refunded to the property owner. Application granted by commissioners and appeal taken by the county to the district court. Judgment entered in favor of the claimant in the district court and appeal prosecuted to this court. Judgment reversed and cause remanded with directions.

Reversed and remanded, with direction. Costs awarded in favor of appellant.

W. L. Harvey, for Appellant.

The action of the county board of equalization is final, and cannot be appealed from. (General Custer Min. Co. v. Van Camp, 2 Idaho 40, 3 P. 22.)

Daniel McLaughlin, for Respondent.

The order made by the board of county commissioners is an appealable order. (Fenton v. Board of County Commrs., 20 Idaho 392, 119 P. 41; sec. 1950, Rev. Codes.)

AILSHIE, C. J. Sullivan and Stewart, JJ., concur.

OPINION

AILSHIE, C. J.

On the 9th of January, 1912, the respondent herein presented a petition and claim to the board of county commissioners of Elmore county, setting forth that the Bengoechea Hotel at Mountainhome had been grossly over-valued, and asked for a refund of $ 400 of taxes which he had paid under protest. The same day the board of commissioners examined the matter and made an order directing that respondent be refunded the sum of $ 155 on account of this claim. The county, acting through the county attorney, thereafter prosecuted an appeal to the district court. The case was tried in the district court and the order of the board of commissioners was modified and affirmed. The county thereupon appealed to this court.

Respondent filed his claim with the board of commissioners, and the board assumed to act thereon under the authority of sec. 1791 of the Rev. Codes. The portion of the section particularly applicable to this case reads as follows:

"The county commissioners of the various counties in the state of Idaho, shall have power to refund to the taxpayer any money to which he may be entitled by reason of the taxes upon property having been paid twice for the same year, or any moneys to which any taxpayer may be entitled by reason of the double assessment or erroneous assessment of property through clerical or other errors, or where, in the judgment of the county commissioners, the assessment upon property was so grossly over-estimated that the same was a mistake. The said money shall be refunded by warrants drawn on the current expense fund of the county."

This claim was based particularly on that clause of the foregoing section which provides that the board may refund taxes when in their judgment the "assessment upon property was so grossly over-estimated that the same amounts to a mistake." The statute is quite clear as to the refunding of taxes paid under certain conditions: First, where the taxes have been paid twice in the same year; second, where a double assessment has been made; third, where an assessment has been made erroneously through clerical or other errors. It is not a difficult matter to ascertain when a case comes within one of the foregoing provisions of the statute, but it becomes a more difficult problem to determine just what the lawmakers intended when writing the provision authorizing a refund "when the property has been so grossly over-estimated that the same amounts to a mistake." In fact, it is a difficult problem to determine just when an...