Commonwealth v. Sciimelz

Citation76 S.E. 905, 114 Va. 364
Case DateJanuary 16, 1913
CourtSupreme Court of Virginia

76 S.E. 905
114 Va. 364

COMMONWEALTH et al.
v.
SCIIMELZ.

Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia.

Jan. 16, 1913.


1. Taxation (§ 273*)—Assessment—Personal Property of Firm—Situs.

Code 1904, § 492, provides that firm property shall be listed for taxation by and be taxed to the firm. Section 494 declares that the commissioner shall make a personal application to each person, linn, or corporation residing, doing business, or having an office in his district to disclose property of the person, firm, or corporation not otherwise taxed and subject to assessment, and Tax Bill, § 143 (Code 1904, p. 2265), provides that, when a firm is engaged in more than one business which is subject to taxation, the firm shall pay taxes on each branch of its business. Held that, where a firm maintained separate places of business in two counties, the property in each place was taxable in the county where it was located, and the firm was not taxable on the property in both places in the county where the members resided.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Taxation, Cent. Dig. § 447; Dec. Dig. § 273.*]

2. Taxation (§ 90*)—Property of Firm— Firm as Entity—"Partnership."

For purposes of taxation, a partnership is treated as an entity separate and distinct from its members, as provided by Code 1904, §§ 492, 494, and Tax Bill, § 143 (Code 1904, p. 2265), and its property is to be taxed to the firm, and not to its individual members.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Taxation, Cent. Dig. § 180; Dec. Dig. § 90.*

For other definitions, see Words and Phrases, vol. 6, pp. 5191-5202; vol. 8, pp. 7746, 7747.]

3. Taxation (§ 494*)—Assessment—Objections—Evidence of Omitted Property.

Code 1904, § 567, provides that any person assessed with taxes who is aggrieved, within two years from the 1st day of September of the year in which the assessment is made, may apply to the proper court for relief. Section 568 declares that, if the court is satisfied that the applicant has been erroneously assessed, it may order the assessment corrected, and order the applicant exonerated from the payment of any excess, and, if the assessment is less than the proper amount, the court shall order the applicant to pay the proper taxes. Held that, where the surviving partner of a firm instituted proceedings to be relieved from taxes erroneously assessed against the firm on property located in a different county, the commonwealth was entitled to introduce proof of omitted property of such firm within the county in order to as-certain the correct amount of the objector's tax in the county of the forum.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Taxation, Cent. Dig. §§ 884-888; Dec. Dig. § 494.*]

Error to Circuit Court, Elizabeth City County.

Proceeding by H. L. Schmelz against the Commonwealth and others to be relieved from an alleged erroneous assessment of taxes. From a judgment for complainant, defendants bring error. Reversed.

The Attorney General, S. Gordon Gumming, E. E. Montague, and Wm. C. L. Taliaferro, all of Hampton, for plaintiffs in error.

J. W. Read, of Newport News, and J. G. Pollard, of Richmond, for defendant in error.

BUCHANAN, J. This is a proceeding instituted by Henry L. Schmelz, surviving and continuing partner of Schmelz Bros., Bankers, under section 567 of the Code, to be relieved from an alleged erroneous assessment of taxes and levies upon personal property of the said partnership for the years 1891 to and including the year 1911.

Upon the hearing of the motion the circuit court of Elizabeth City county was of opinion that the assessment complained of was erroneous, in this: that the property assessed was not taxable in the county of Elizabeth City or in the city of Hampton, and entered an order exonerating the firm from the payment of all taxes and levies on said property in the said county and city. The auditor of public accounts, not being satisfied with that decision, petitioned the court, in accordance with the provisions of section 573 of the Code, for a rehearing. Upon the rehearing, which was de novo, the court being of opinion that its order on the original hearing was correct, adhered to and confirmed it. To that order this writ of error was awarded upon the petition of the commonwealth, the county of Elizabeth City, and the city of Hampton.

The court certifies in its order that upon the rehearing the following facts were proved: "That from 1886 to 1903 H. L. Schmelz and Geo. A. Schmelz conducted a private banking business in the town of Hampton, Va., under the firm name and style of 'Schmelz Bros., Bankers, Hampton, Virginia, ' and that on July 1, 1903, they discontinued the banking business in Hampton, but continued to own and hold property in Elizabeth City county. In 1891 the same partners opened a bank in the city of Newport News, Va., under the firm name and style of 'Schmelz Bros., Bankers, Newport News, Virginia, ' and the said business in Newport...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 practice notes
  • Putnam v. Ford
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court of Virginia
    • 13 Noviembre 1930
    ...law in cases other than cases of appeals of right." This, in substance, has long been the law. Code 1919, § 2391; Commonwealth v. Schmelz, 114 Va. 364, 76 S. E. 905. Judgment at the rehearing was entered on November 9, 1929. To it a writ of error was allowed as of April 7, 1930, and in ampl......
  • Putnam v. Ford
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court of Virginia
    • 13 Noviembre 1930
    ...in cases other than cases of appeals of right." This, in substance, has long been the law. Code 1919, section 2391; Commonwealth Schmelz, 114 Va. 364, 76 S.E. Judgment at the rehearing was entered on November 9, 1929. To it a writ of error was allowed as of April 7, 1930, and in ample time.......
  • Commonwealth v. Southeastern Iron Corp.*
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court of Virginia
    • 11 Junio 1925
    ...if the property belong to a company or firm, it shall be listed by, and taxed to, the company or firm; and in Commonwealth v. Schmelz, 114 Va. 364, 76 S. E. 905, it is held that a partnership is, for the purposes of taxation, treated as an entity; and it is there said: "The firm and not the......
  • Com. of Va. v. South. Iron Corp.
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court of Virginia
    • 11 Junio 1925
    ...that if the property belong to a company or firm, it shall be listed by and taxed to the company or firm; and in Commonwealth Schmelz, 114 Va. 364, 76 S.E. 905, it is held that a partnership is, for the purposes of taxation, treated as an entity; and it is there said: "The partnership and n......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
15 cases
  • Putnam v. Ford
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court of Virginia
    • 13 Noviembre 1930
    ...law in cases other than cases of appeals of right." This, in substance, has long been the law. Code 1919, § 2391; Commonwealth v. Schmelz, 114 Va. 364, 76 S. E. 905. Judgment at the rehearing was entered on November 9, 1929. To it a writ of error was allowed as of April 7, 1930, and in ampl......
  • Putnam v. Ford
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court of Virginia
    • 13 Noviembre 1930
    ...in cases other than cases of appeals of right." This, in substance, has long been the law. Code 1919, section 2391; Commonwealth Schmelz, 114 Va. 364, 76 S.E. Judgment at the rehearing was entered on November 9, 1929. To it a writ of error was allowed as of April 7, 1930, and in ample time.......
  • Commonwealth v. Southeastern Iron Corp.*
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court of Virginia
    • 11 Junio 1925
    ...if the property belong to a company or firm, it shall be listed by, and taxed to, the company or firm; and in Commonwealth v. Schmelz, 114 Va. 364, 76 S. E. 905, it is held that a partnership is, for the purposes of taxation, treated as an entity; and it is there said: "The firm and not the......
  • Com. of Va. v. South. Iron Corp.
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court of Virginia
    • 11 Junio 1925
    ...that if the property belong to a company or firm, it shall be listed by and taxed to the company or firm; and in Commonwealth Schmelz, 114 Va. 364, 76 S.E. 905, it is held that a partnership is, for the purposes of taxation, treated as an entity; and it is there said: "The partnership and n......
  • 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