City of Detroit v. Jepp

• Decision Date: 23 January 1884
• Citation: City of Detroit v. Jepp, 52 Mich. 458, 18 N.W. 217 (Mich. 1884)
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Parties: DETROIT v. JEPP.

18 N.W. 217

52 Mich. 458

DETROIT v. JEPP.

Supreme Court of Michigan

January 23, 1884

Where such a specific remedy is provided in the tax law as an enforcement of the collection by levy on any personal property of the delinquent found in the county, no suit will lie unless specially provided for, and then only as so provided.

Suit could not be brought by the city of Detroit for unpaid personal property taxes under the charter as existing previous to July, 1881.

Error to Wayne.

John B Corliss and Henry M. Duffield, for plaintiff.

William Look and Weeks & Randall, for defendant and appellant.

CAMPBELL, J.

The only question in this case is, whether under the charter of Detroit, as existing previous to July, 1881, suit could be brought by the city for unpaid personal property taxes.The charter provided very fully for the enforcement of such collection by process from the receiver of taxes, who could at any time after default collect the amount by levy on any personal property of the delinquent within any part of the city.No provision was made to sell lands, except for the land taxes.It has always been recognized as the law of this state that where such a specific remedy is provided in the tax law as the proper method of collection, no suit will lie unless specially provided for, and then only as so provided.Staley v. Columbus,36 Mich. 38;McCallum v Bethany,42 Mich. 457;[S.C.4 N.W. 164;]Putnam v Fife Lake,45 Mich. 125;[S.C.7 N.W. 699.]Such is the weight of authority elsewhere under similar conditions.See Cooley, Tax'n, 13.Nothing has been pointed out in the charter which directly or impliedly favors any different doctrine.And it may be suggested that...