City Of Roanoke v. Williams

Decision Date21 September 1933
Citation170 S.E. 726
CourtVirginia Supreme Court
PartiesCITY OF ROANOKE. v. WILLIAMS.

Error to Hustings Court of Roanoke.

Proceeding by C. R. Williams to correct an assessment of certain realty for taxation by the City of Roanoke. Judgment reducing the assessment, and the city brings error.

Reversed, and original assessment reinstated.

Argued before CAMPBELL, C. J., and HOLT, EPES, HUDGINS, and BROWNING, JJ.

Robert C. Jackson, of Roanoke, for plaintiff in error.

Dillard, Moomaw & Dillard, of Roanoke, for defendants in error.

HOLT, Justice.

This is a proceeding brought for the correction of an assessment for taxation of certain real estate in the city of Roanoke. That assessment it is claimed was erroneous and excessive.

Mr. C. R. Williams is the owner of the real estate in question. It is a lot on the southeast corner of Church avenue and Henry street, fronting 50 feet on Church avenue and extending back between parallel lines 95 feet to an alley. On it is a building in which are six small shops. The board of assessors valued this property for the purposes of taxation at $43,000 apportioned thus: Land, $35,-000; building, $8,000. These figures were approved by the Board of Equalization. The trial court reduced this assessment to $38,-500. It valued the land at $31,500, and the building at $7,000.

For Mr. Williams three witnesses have testified. Mr. M. C. Franklin, a realtor, valued the building at $37,500 and the land at $40,-000, thus making a total of $77,500, but was further of opinion that there should have been charged off against the building for depreciation, 20 per cent. or 25 per cent. He knew of no sales of land in this block fronting on Church avenue, but said that a corner lot, just across Henry street, fronting on Church avenue, whose dimensions were the same as those of the lot in judgment, had been sold for $101,000.

Mr. J. W. Boswell valued the land at $60,-000 and the building at $15,000. About nine years ago it sold for $75,000.

Mr. E. G. Upson thought that the building was worth $15,000, and the land $62,500.

Mr. M. F. Cleaton, one of the assessors, in justifying the assessment, called attention to the fact that it is one square south of Campbell avenue and Henry street, probably the second most valuable corner in the city, that it is one square west of Jefferson street and Church avenue, probably the third most valuable corner In the city, and that by it run nearly all of the bus lines operating through Roanoke. Two or three years ago he offered to buy it for $110,000. Mr. Williams priced this property at $120,000, but was willing to take $110,000, if his brother, then interested, would consent. We do not know why the sale fell through. He undertook to list for sale other Church avenue lots in this block, but was unsuccessful except in one instance. A Mr. Bissee, who owned a 25-foot interior lot, said that he would consider a $50,000 offer. The witness was in touch with Mr. Williams and his tenants, and from information so obtained, testified that the monthly rent roll was from $700 to $750.

T. W. Fugate thought that $100,000 was a fair market value. He owns or controls a 25-foot adjoining lot and said that he would not consider a $50,000 offer.

J. T. Banby believed $90,000 to be a conservative figure.

Oscar A. Wall said that its worth was from $100,000 to $110,000, and that Mr. Williams had listed it with him for sale at $125,000.

By agreement the evidence of Mr. Cleaton, given in the cases of Ritchie v. City of Roanoke and Peerless Hardware Co. v. City...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Bankers Pocahontas Coal Co. v. County Court of McDowell County
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • December 19, 1950
    ... ... See City of Roanoke v. Gibson, 161 Va. 342, 170 S.E. 723; Wild Goose Country Club v. Butte County, 60 ... ...
  • Alfred J. Sweet, Inc v. City of Auburn
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • August 29, 1935
    ...gravamen of his complaint is the lack of equality and uniformity. Spear v. City of Bath, 125 Me. 27, 130 A. 507; City of Roanoke v. Williams, 161 Va. 351, 170 S. E. 726. If, however, he shows that his property is assessed substantially in excess of its true value, a presumption arises of in......
  • City Of Roanoke v. Gibson
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court
    • September 21, 1933
  • Board of Sup'rs of Fairfax County v. Leasco Realty, Inc., 780914
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court
    • June 6, 1980
    ...Unless it plainly appears that some rule of uniformity has been departed from, the assessment will stand. City of Roanoke v. Williams, 161 Va. 351, 354, 170 S.E. 726, 728 (1933). The applicant must show manifest error. City of Norfolk v. Snyder, 161 Va. 288, 293, 170 S.E. 721, 723 Moreover,......
  • 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