Christian Association of the University of Pennsylvania v. City of Philadelphia

• Decision Date: 05 March 1921
• Docket Number: 299-1920
• Citation: 75 Pa.Super. 516
• Parties: Christian Association of the University of Pennsylvania, Appellant, v. City of Philadelphia et al
• Court: Pennsylvania Superior Court

75 Pa.Super. 516

Christian Association of the University of Pennsylvania, Appellant, v. City of Philadelphia et al

No. 299-1920

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

March 5, 1921

Argued October 21, 1920

Appeal by plaintiff, from decree of C.P. No. 5, Phila. Co.-1918, No 1533, in equity, dismissing bill in equity in the case of Christian Association of the University of Pennsylvania v The City of Philadelphia, The Board of Education of the School District of Philadelphia, and W. Freeland Kendrick receiver of taxes of the City of Philadelphia.

Bill in equity to restrain the collection of taxes. Before Martin, J.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court.

The court dismissed the bill. Plaintiff appealed.

Errors assigned were in dismissing exceptions to findings of fact and conclusions of law and the decree of the court.

Shippen Lewis, of MacCoy, Evans, Hitchinson & Lewis, for appellant. -- The taxes were not collectible because the plaintiff is a public charity: Phila. v. Pennsylvania Hospital, 154 Pa. 9; Com. v. Lynchburg Y. M. C. A., 115 Va. 745.

Mayne R. Longstreth, Assistant City Solicitor, and with him David J. Smyth, City Solicitor, for appellee, cited: Donohugh's App., 86 Pa. 306; Phila. v. W. C. A., 125 Pa. 572; Phila. v. Barber, 160 Pa. 123; Am. S. S. U. v Phila., 161 Pa. 307; Penna. Hospital v. Delaware County, 169 Pa. 305; Pocono Pines Assembly v. Monroe Co., 29 Pa.Super. 36; Sisters of the Blessed Sacrament, 38 Pa.Super. 640.

Before Orlady, P. J., Porter, Henderson, Head, Trexler, Keller and Linn, JJ.

OPINION

TREXLER, J.

The Christian Association of the University of Pennsylvania was incorporated for the promotion of the spiritual welfare of the students of said institution by encouraging Christian fellowship and cooperation. It occupies property known as 3905 Spruce street, Philadelphia, and maintains there an international students' house, and in the rear of the lot there is a stable. The purpose of the maintenance of the house is to provide a home house for a large number of foreign students under Christian influence where they can get in contact with the best elements of American life. The court below found that the complainant corporation is an institution of public charity, founded and endowed and maintained by private charity. It is run at a loss, and the deficit each year is made up by the contributions of its friends. The Board of Revision of Taxes has assessed the property for taxation for the year 1918, at forty thousand dollars, but has found that sixteen thousand dollars in value is exempt, leaving the taxable amount twenty-four thousand dollars. The plaintiff filed this bill in equity asking that it be declared to be entirely exempt from taxation. The question arises under article IX, section 1, of the Constitution providing that " the General Assembly may by general laws exempt from taxation institutions of purely public charity, and the Acts of Assembly exempting such property are May 14, 1874, P. L. 158; May 29, 1901, P. L. 319; March 24, 1909, P. L. 54; June 13, 1911, P. L. 898. The Act of July 17, 1919, P. L. 1021, was passed after the matter before us arose. The court below has found that portions of the property should be taxed, to wit: the dining room, the rooms occupied by the superintendent at a monthly rental, the rooms let to various students, the unused portion of the stable and the portion used for storage purposes, and the lawn used as the driveway for the stable.

It is clear that to exempt the whole property it must be in its entirety actually used and occupied for public and private charity. " On the general question of what part of the property of a charity is exempted from taxation, a plain distinction is to be observed in all our cases. Property which is not used directly for the purposes and in the operation of the charity, but for profit, is not exempt, and the devotion of the profit to the support of the charity will not alter the result of this class of cases. American Sunday School Union v. Phila. et al., 161 Pa. 307, is the exemplar and authority. But property which is used directly for the purposes and in the operation of the charity is exempt though it may also be used in a manner to yield some return and thereby reduce the expenses: Donohugh's App., 86 Pa. 306; Phila. v. Pennsylvania Hospital, 154 Pa. 9; House of Refuge v. Smith, 140 Pa. 387" : Pennsylvania Hospital v. Delaware County et al., 169 Pa. 305.

This distinction as stated above is plain, but in its application the courts have had some difficulty: White v. Smith, 189 Pa. 222. As to some of the items found to be taxable by the court below there may be some doubt. As to the stable in the rear of the lot, in which the...