Central Fibre Products Co., Inc. v. Kansas State Tax Commission

Decision Date10 November 1939
Docket Number34426.
Citation95 P.2d 353,150 Kan. 665
PartiesCENTRAL FIBRE PRODUCTS CO., Inc., v. KANSAS STATE TAX COMMISSION et al.
CourtKansas Supreme Court

Syllabus by the Court.

Under statute only purpose new trial can serve is for re-examination of fact issues. Gen.St.1935, 60-3001.

Where appeal from order of state tax commission determining that additional tax is due is presented to district court on agreed statement of facts, motion for new trial is unnecessary, since only issue presented is one of law. Gen.St.1935, 60-3001.

Judgment of district court on appeal from order of state tax commission determining that an additional tax is due is a "final judgment" and time in which appeal may be taken therefrom is not extended by filing motion for new trial. Gen.St.1935, 60-3001; Const. art. 3, § 3.

On appeal from order of state tax commission determining that an additional tax is due, motion for new trial is addressed only to trial court's discretion and ruling thereon is not in and of itself appealable. Gen.St.1935, 60-3001; Const. art 3, § 3.

An appeal from order denying motion for new trial after judgment of district court on appeal from order of state tax commission determining that an additional tax was due was required to be dismissed by court on its own motion, where no appeal was taken from judgment rendered since no appealable question was presented. Gen.St.1935, 60-3001; Const. art. 3 § 3.

1. Where an appeal from an order of the State Tax Commission determining an additional tax is due is presented to the district court on an agreed statement of facts, a motion for a new trial is unnecessary, the only issue presented being one of law.

2. Where the district court renders judgment on such an appeal it is a final judgment and the time in which an appeal may be taken to the supreme court is not extended by filing a motion for a new trial.

3. There being no statutory provision for a new trial of an issue of law, a motion for a new trial, as above mentioned is addressed only to the trial court's discretion and the ruling thereon is not in and of itself appealable.

4. Where in such a case a motion for a new trial is denied, and the losing party appeals to the supreme court from that ruling only and not from the judgment rendered, no appealable question is presented and the appeal must be dismissed.

Appeal from District Court, Reno County; John G. Somers, Judge.

Proceeding by the Central Fibre Products Company, Inc., to review an order of the State Tax Commission approving an assessment of an additional income tax by the State Income Tax Department. From a judgment finding that there was no additional tax liability, the Kansas State Tax Commission and the Income Tax Department appeal.

Appeal dismissed.

C. A. Burnett, of Pittsburg, Frank G. Theis, of Arkansas City, John K. Speck, of Topeka, and Vernon Rosenstahl, of Parsons, for appellants.

Ellis D. Bever, of Wichita, and Charles M. Williams, Donald C. Martindell, William D. P. Carey, and Wesley E. Brown, all of Hutchinson, for appellee.

THIELE Justice.

The Central Fibre Products Company filed its income tax return for the year ending June 30, 1935 with the Income Tax Department which on July 12, 1937 determined additional tax was due. Under appropriate procedure the State Tax Commission on February 23, 1938 made its order finding the assessment to be correct. The company appealed to the district court. In that court the matter was submitted upon a written stipulation of facts, and on January 31, 1939 the court found there was no additional tax liability and rendered judgment in favor of the company. On February 3, 1939 the State Tax Commission filed its motion for a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Hamilton v. Binger
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • January 25, 1947
    ...in and of itself is not an appealable order. Jackson County Com'rs v. Commission of Revenue and Taxation, supra; Central Fibre Products Co. v. State Tax Comm., supra. finally, where--as here--the record discloses that a motion for new trial was made and overruled but neither the motion nor ......
  • Heniff v. Clausen
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • January 24, 1942
    ... ... plaintiff's petition did not state facts sufficient to ... constitute a cause of ... Gas Co. v. Dooley, 73 Kan. 758, 84 P. 719; ... Bennett ... See Central Fibre Products Co. v. Kansas State Tax ... ...
  • Peterson v. Board of County Com'rs of Linn County, 39293
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • April 10, 1954
    ...v. Firmin, 143 Kan. 794, 57 P.2d 465; National Bank of Topeka v. State, 146 Kan. 97, 68 P.2d 1076; Central Fibre Products Co. v. Kansas State Tax Comm., 150 Kan. 665, 95 P.2d 353; Evans v. George, 162 Kan. 614, 178 P.2d 687; Murrow v. Powell, 167 Kan. 283, 205 P.2d 1193; Perkins v. Lenora R......
  • Stinson v. McConnell
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • June 9, 1945
    ... ... White v. Railway Co., ... 74 Kan. 778, 88 P. 54, 11 Ann.Cas. 550; ... Olson, 150 Kan. 528, 95 P.2d 352; Central Fibre ... Products Co. v. State Tax Comm., 150 ... Jackson County Com'rs v. Commission of Revenue and ... Taxation, 156 Kan. 585, 134 ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT