Dailey v. State ex rel. Bigler

• Court: Indiana Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: HADLEY
• Citation: Dailey v. State ex rel. Bigler, 171 Ind. 646, 87 N.E. 4 (Ind. 1909)
• Decision Date: 03 February 1909
• Docket Number: No. 21,377.,21,377.
• Parties: DAILEY v. STATE ex rel. BIGLER, State Auditor.

171 Ind. 646

87 N.E. 4

DAILEY

v.STATE ex rel. BIGLER, State Auditor.

No. 21,377.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

Feb. 3, 1909.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Boone County; S. R. Artman, Judge.

Action by the State, on the relation of Warren Bigler, Auditor of State, against Americus C. Dailey. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals to the Appellate Court, and it (86 N. E. 498) transferred the cause to the Supreme Court. Reversed.

T. J. Terhune, R. W. Adney, and Miller, Shirley & Miller, for appellant. Chas. W. Miller, H. M. Dowling, and Wm. C. Geake, for appellee.

HADLEY, J.

Appellant was auditor of state for two consecutive terms, from January, 1895, to January, 1899. On March 6, 1906, seven years after appellant's retirement, the relator, who was then auditor of state, rendered to him an account stated, showing an alleged indebtedness from him to the state in the sum of $26,033.51, and demanded payment. Payment being refused, this action was commenced March 29, 1906.

The complaint, excluding formal parts, is in these words: “That the relator is the auditor of state for the state of Indiana, and that heretofore, to wit, at the general election in the state of Indiana, held on the 6th day of November, 1894, the defendant, Americus C. Dailey, was duly elected as auditor of state for the state of Indiana, and thereafter, to wit, on the 24th day of January, 1895, he duly qualified as such, and took possession of said office as auditor of state, and entered upon the official duties pertaining thereto. That thereafter, to wit, at the general election in the state of Indiana, held on the 3d day of November, 1896, said defendant was again duly elected as auditor of state for the state of Indiana, and thereafter, to wit, on the 25th day of January, 1897, he qualified as such under his said second election, took possession of said office of auditor of state, and entered upon the performance of the official duties pertaining thereto. That his second term as auditor of state for the state of Indiana expired on the 25th day of January, 1899, and upon that day said defendant ceased to be auditor of state for the state of Indiana, and his successor took possession of said office and entered upon the performance of the official duties pertaining thereto. The relator further says that the defendant, Americus C. Dailey, is indebted to the state of Indiana in the sum of $30,000 for insurance taxes received by him, wrongfully retained, and not paid into the treasury of state for the state of Indiana; for interest on same at the rate of 6 per cent. from the date when due the state of Indiana, as required by law; for interest on deferred and delayed payments in making reports and payments to the treasurer of state as required by law, at 6 per cent., from the date when due and payable to the treasurer of state for the state of Indiana; together with 10 per cent. penalty on all of said amounts wrongfully retained, held, and unpaid-all as specifically shown by bill of particulars filed herewith, made a part hereof, and marked ‘Exhibit A.’ The relator further says: That on the 16th day of March, 1906, he rendered an ‘Account Stated’ to the defendant, showing the amount due the state of Indiana from said defendant, on the 1st day of March, 1906, and demanded immediate payment thereof. That the said defendant has wholly failed to comply with such demand; a copy of said ‘Account Stated’ and said ‘Demand’ being filed herewith, made a part hereof, and marked ‘Exhibit B.’ That said sum as shown by bill of particulars is due and remains wholly unpaid. Wherefore the relator demands judgment against said defendant for the sum of $30,000, and for all other proper relief.”

The bill of particulars, filed as Exhibit A, is headed as follows: “Taxes Collected from Insurance Companies by A. C. Dailey, Auditor of State, from,” etc.; the summary being as follows:

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
                ¦To insurance taxes received and wrongfully retained as commission, as¦$1,098 ¦
                ¦shown by your report to the treasurer of state for six months ending ¦55     ¦
                ¦June 30, 1895                                                        ¦       ¦
                +---------------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦
                ¦To interest on said amount from July 1, 1895, to March 1, 1906, at 6 ¦697 37 ¦
                ¦per cent.                                                            ¦       ¦
                +---------------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦
                ¦To insurance taxes received and wrongfully retained as commission, as¦5,419  ¦
                ¦shown by your report to the treasurer of state for six months ending ¦59     ¦
                ¦December 31, 1895                                                    ¦       ¦
                +---------------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦
                ¦To interest on said amount from January 6, 1896, to March 1, 1906, at¦3,301  ¦
                ¦6 per cent.                                                          ¦41     ¦
                +---------------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦
                ¦To insurance taxes received and wrongfully retained as commission, as¦7,002  ¦
                ¦shown by your report to the treasurer of state for six months ending ¦43     ¦
                ¦June 30, 1896                                                        ¦       ¦
                +---------------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦
                ¦To interest on said amount from July 6, 1896 to March 1, 1906, at 6  ¦4,056  ¦
                ¦per cent.                                                            ¦55     ¦
                +---------------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦
                ¦To interest on deferred payments less interest on advance payments in¦2,101  ¦
                ¦making partial settlements with the treasurer of state at 6 per cent.¦84     ¦
                +---------------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦
                ¦Total insurance taxes retained as commission, interest on same, and  ¦23,668 ¦
                ¦on deferred payments, less interest on advance payments              ¦74     ¦
                +---------------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦
                ¦To 10 per cent. penalty on the total amount above stated as provided ¦2,366  ¦
                ¦by section 7638, Burns' R. S. 1901, Statutes of Indiana              ¦77     ¦
                +---------------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦
                ¦Total due the state of Indiana March 1, 1906                         ¦$26,035¦
                ¦                                                                     ¦51     ¦
                +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
                

The complaint is attacked for the first time in this court for a failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The defendant below had the statutory right (section 348, Burns' Ann. St. 1908) to question the legal sufficiency of the complaint after judgment and appeal to this court, and if the complaint is found to be wholly wanting in some fact essential to a good cause of action, on any admissible theory, or if there be found present some averment that absolutely destroys the plaintiff...