City of St. Louis v. Temples

• Decision Date: 08 April 1941
• Docket Number: No. 25610.,25610.
• Citation: City of St. Louis v. Temples, 149 S.W.2d 888 (Mo. App. 1941)
• Parties: CITY OF ST. LOUIS v. TEMPLES et al.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

149 S.W.2d 888

CITY OF ST. LOUIS v. TEMPLES et al.

No. 25610.

St. Louis Court of Appeals. Missouri.

April 8, 1941.

Rehearing Denied April 22, 1941.

Appeal from St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction; Joseph L. Simpson, Judge.

"Not to be reported in State Reports."

Luther Temples and the Potashnick Truck Service, Inc., were convicted of violating ordinance requiring payment of license fee for commercial vehicles having capacity of less than two tons, and they appeal.

Affirmed.

Bailey & Bailey, of Sikeston, for appellants.

E. H. Wayman, Martin P. Hart, and Harold C. Hanke, all of St. Louis, for respondent.

HUGHES, Presiding Judge.

This is an appeal from a conviction and assessment of a fine of $25 against both defendants in the St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction, to which court the case had been appealed from a conviction and fine in City Court No. 1. The appellants are charged with a violation of Sections 1528 and 1529 of City Ordinance No. 41386. Section 1528, in so far as it is applicable to this case, provides that there shall be annually levied and collected on all motor vehicles, trailers and semitrailers, a license fee of $3.50 for commercial vehicles having a capacity of less than two tons. Section 1529 provides that any owner or operator of any motor vehicle who shall fail to pay the license fee shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and fined not less than $10 nor more than $500.

On the 12th day of May, 1939, the date alleged in the complaint, and on divers other dates and times prior thereto, the defendant Luther Temples operated in the City of St. Louis a truck belonging to and in the service of the defendant Potashnick Truck Service, Inc., a Missouri corporation engaged in the business of transporting freight. The corporation has its principal office at Sikeston, Mo., and has a branch office in the City of St. Louis. The business of the corporate defendant is transporting freight from St. Louis to points outside the city, and from points outside the city to consignees in the city. The truck involved was used exclusively in the city for the purpose of transporting freight to and from the company's office in the City of St. Louis, and was not used in the City of Sikeston. It was admitted that no license tax had been paid.

Appellants deny liability under the license tax ordinance on the ground that the only authority for such ordinance is Section 7780, R.S.1929, as amended by the Laws of 1935, p. 294, Mo.St.Ann. § 7780, p. 5228, which provides that, "Municipalities may, by ordinance, levy and collect license taxes from the owners of and dealers in motor vehicles and trailers, residing in such municipalities, * * *" and so appellants only contention is that the city has no authority to collect a license tax against a nonresident owned truck.

We see no occasion for dispute as to whether the license fee provided for in the city ordinance under which the complaint is filed, is a tax on the vehicle or an occupation tax. The ordinance in plain words says there shall be annually levied and collected on all motor vehicles a license fee. The license fee is required for each and every motor vehicle an owner may have in use in the city, and is a license tax on the vehicle.

Section 7780, R.S.1929, as amended by the Laws of 1935, p. 294, Mo.St.Ann. § 7780, p. 5228, limits the right of a municipality to collect a license tax on motor vehicles to residents of the city. And so the real question involved in this case is whether the defendants, under the facts in the case, come under the classification of residents of the city. No such issue was involved in the case of City of Sikeston v. Marsh, Mo.App., 110 S.W.2d 1135, cited by both plaintiff and defendants. In that case the truck, belonging to a St. Louis corporation and operated from its St. Louis office, was delivering its goods into the City of Sikeston. In this case it is agreed that the corporate defendant has its principal office at Sikeston, but it is also agreed that it has a branch office located at 618 S. 3rd St., St. Louis, Mo., and has painted on each side of the truck involved the words "Local Truck Service," and "Potashnick Truck Service, Inc.," with its St. Louis telephone number and street address, and was used exclusively in the City of St. Louis.

The Potashnick Truck Service, Inc., is a Missouri corporation, and as such, although its principal office is at Sikeston, it has a right to conduct its business anywhere in the State, but of course such right is subject to compliance with local...