City of Richmond v. Clifford

Decision Date09 January 1914
Docket NumberNo. 22,537.,22,537.
Citation182 Ind. 17,103 N.E. 789
PartiesCITY OF RICHMOND v. CLIFFORD.
CourtIndiana Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from Circuit Court, Hancock County; Will M. Sparks, Judge.

Action by Fremont Clifford against the City of Richmond. There was a judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appealed to the Appellate Court, and it transferred the cause under Burns' Ann. St. 1908, § 1405, to the Supreme Court. Affirmed.

Alonzo M. Gardner, of Richmond, Cook & Cook, of Greenfield, and Frederick G. White, of Richmond, for appellant. Wilfred Jessup, of Richmond, Sylvester Meek and Jackson & Sample, all of Greenfield, and Reuben Conner, of Connersville, for appellee.

MYERS, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment rendered against appellant in favor of appellee, upon a contract for searching for, discovering, and reporting for extension upon its tax duplicate, alleged omitted taxes upon a percentage basis. The errors assigned arise upon exceptions to the conclusions of law stated, upon the facts found, and in overruling the motion for a new trial.

The findings of fact are in their material parts as follows: One Morrison was, from the year 1880, to the time of his death, in August, 1893, a resident of the city of RichAugust, 1893, a resident of the city of Richmond, county of Wayne. From January 1, 1884, to August 12, 1893, the date of his death, Morrison was the owner of 1,660 shares of the capital stock of the Morrison-Plummer Drug Company, a private corporation of the state of Illinois, and during all of that time doing business in Chicago, Ill. Said shares of stock were of the par value of $166,000. In each of said years, from 1884 to 1893, inclusive, said Morrison was, as such resident of the city of Richmond, assessed for taxation, and in each of said years signed and swore to an assessment list in the form prescribed by the statutes of Indiana; at no time during his life did said Morrison give any statement of his ownership of said stock in any assessment list of his property, neither was said stock, or any part thereof, by any officer ever placed on the tax duplicates of Wayne county, or of the city of Richmond, during the lifetime of Morrison; Morrison never paid any taxes to the city of Richmond on said stock in said corporation during his lifetime. The value of said stock was $166,000; during all of said time said Morrison owned it. Morrison died testate, and one Hibbard was named in his will as executor thereof, and duly qualified and acted as executor of said will, and on the 29th day of October, 1893, duly filed with the clerk of the circuit court of Wayne county an inventory and appraisement of the estate of said Morrison, and in said inventory said stock in said drug company was duly inventoried and appraised at its par value, to wit, $166,000. On April 8, 1894, said executor made, signed, and swore to an assessment list as such executor of said will before the township assessor in said city of Richmond, in which he wholly failed to list or report said stock in said corporation. On May 24, 1895, the said executor made, signed, and swore to an assessment list before the township assessor in said city of Richmond, in which, in responce to the interrogatory printed in said list, as follows: (8) All shares of stock in corporations formed outside of this state”-he made the following answer: “$166,000.00. This stock pays tax in Illinois, and should not be taxed here.” That at said time, said executor held said stock as such executor. That previous to July 1, 1897, said stock had never been assessed for taxation by the county of Wayne, nor by said city of Richmond, against said Morrison, his executors, or legatees, nor did said stock prior to July 1, 1897, appear upon the tax duplicates of the county of Wayne, or of said city, against said Morrison, or his executor or legatees, or heirs, or any one else, and that prior to the 1st day of July, 1897, the defendant, the city of Richmond, had never collected any taxes on said stock.

At a meeting of the common council of the city of Richmond, April 6, 1896, the committee on finance reported a proposal and contract from William G. Young, for the discovery of omitted city taxables, and recommended the acceptance thereof, as follows: To his Honor and Members of the Council- Gentlemen: I propose to discover omitted taxables such as moneys, notes, bonds, stocks, etc., located in this city and other counties that are taxable in this county, and report my discoveries to the clerk of this city for assessment and collection of the taxes thereon for a sum equal to twenty per cent. of the taxes collected, no money to be paid to me until the taxes so discovered above are paid into the city treasury. Respectfully your, Wm. G. Young”-followed by a resolution of the council that the following contract in form be approved: “This agreement, made and entered into by and between the council of the city of Richmond, in Wayne county, and state of Indiana, and William G. Young, witnesseth: That by this contract said William G. Young is employed by this council to make search for, and discover property that has been secreted and omitted from the tax duplicate of said city. Said discoveries of secreted and omitted property shall be by said William G. Young reported to the clerk of said city, and by him entered upon the tax duplicate in the hands of the city treasurer and at the same time said treasurer shall be charged with the taxes so entered upon the duplicate. For the services rendered by the said Young under this contract it is agreed that he, the said Young, shall receive a sum equal to twenty per cent. of the taxes collected by reason of said discoveries and actually paid into the treasury. Payment to be made upon the warrant properly issued upon the showing by the said treasurer that he has collected such taxes by reason of the discovery aforesaid and by virtue of this contract. But in no case shall percentage be deemed due or owing until the taxes have actually been paid into the city treasury. This contract to continue and be in force for a period of one year from date. Dated at Richmond this 6th day of April, 1896.” On June 2, 1896, Young assigned to the plaintiff all his right, title, and interest in said written contract, which assignment was indorsed on the margin of the record of said contract, in the records of defendant, in the office of its clerk and in the words and figures as follows, to wit: “For value received, I hereby assign and transfer all my right, title and interest in and to the within contract to Fremont Clifford, this 2d day of June, 1896. [Signed] Wm. G. Young. Attest: Jos. H. Winder, City Clerk.”

On April 5, 1897, the common council extended the contract with appellee for the period of one year from April 6, 1897. June 12, 1897, plaintiff filed with the city clerk of defendant, and in the city clerk's office of the defendant, a written report or information, notifying said clerk and said city of Richmond, in substance, that the said Morrison, a former resident of the city of Richmond, Wayne county, Ind., and his estate after his death, had owned and held, during the years from 1884 to 1895, both inclusive, $100,000 par value of the capital stock of the Morrison-Plummer Drug Company, a private corporation of the city of Chicago, state of Illinois; that said capital stock was subject to taxation by said city of Richmond for each and all of said years, and that said capital stock had not been assessed for taxation, and had been wholly omitted from the tax duplicates of the city for each and all of said years.

On ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases

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