Danville Traction & Power Co v. City Of Danville
Decision Date | 10 June 1937 |
Citation | 191 S.E. 592 |
Court | Virginia Supreme Court |
Parties | DANVILLE TRACTION & POWER CO. v. CITY OF DANVILLE. |
Appeal from Corporation Court of Danville; Henry C. Leigh, Judge.
Action by the City of Danville against the Danville Traction & Power Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Argued before CAMPBELL, C. J., and HOLT, HUDGINS, GREGORY, BROWNING, EGGLESTON, and SPRATLEY, JJ.
Harris, Harvey & Brown and Crews & Clement, all of Danville, for plaintiff in error.
A. M. Aiken, of Danville, for defendant in error.
The city of Danville in April, 1936, instituted an action by notice of motion against the Danville Traction & Power Company, to recover the sum of $10,337.60 with certain interest thereon. This amount was claimed to be due by virtue of a contract, in the form of a franchise ordinance, allegedly providing for compensation for use of the city's streets. Neither party desiring a jury, the case was submitted to the judge of the corporation court of Danville, who, after hearing the evidence and argument of counsel, found for the plaintiff.
The Danville Traction & Power Company, hereinafter called the defendant, is the successor corporation to the Danville Street Car Company. It has taken over and possesses all of the rights, privileges, and franchises of the former corporation, granted under the ordinance in question here, subject to all of the obligations and duties enforced thereunder.
The ordinance was enacted in 1899, and was to continue for fifty years from and after the 1st day of January, 1900. So much of it as is pertinent to our inquiry reads as follows:
"(19) That the City of Danville, respecting and continuing its assent to the exemptions from municipal taxation heretofore granted to the said Danville Street Car Company, hereby expressly reserves the right to levy a property tax on all the property to be constructed and owned hereunder within the city limits by said company, its successors and assigns, at the same rate other property within the said city is taxed * * * and that in consideration of the rights, privileges and franchises herein granted the said company, its successors and assigns, shall annually after January 1, 1901, pay to said city, as license taxes are paid, an amount equal to one-half of one percentum of the first forty thousand dollars of the gross receipts of said company, its successors and assigns, from all the railways operated by said company, its successors and assigns, and one percentum on the said gross receipts in excess of said forty thousand dollars." (Italics supplied.)
The property tax of the traction company due to the city of Danville and its franchise tax due to the state of Virginia have been paid, and are not in question here. The stated percentage specified in the latter part of section 19 of the ordinance has been paid each year through the year 1927. No legal action was taken by the city to collect for subsequent years until the institution of this action in 1936. It appears that certain assessing and collecting officials of the city of Danville termed the percentage payment as a license or franchise tax, and so billed the traction company and so receipted it for whatever payments were made. The company raised no questions as to the nature of the obligation under which it made such payments.
The traction company now contends that the payment provided to be made under the ordinance is a franchise or license tax, and, therefore, not collectible under the Constitution and statutes of the state. The city takes the position that it is a contract or agreement by ordinance, providing for compensation for the use of its streets and avenues.
It is agreed by both parties that if the ordinance provides for a franchise or license tax, the city cannot recover; but if it provides for compensation for use of the streets, the city is entitled to recover.
Section 177 of the Constitution and section 216 of the Tax Code 1936 ( ), both provide that the annual state franchise tax upon gross earnings, required of railway corporations and the ad valorem taxes on their property, shall be in lieu of all taxes or license charges whatsoever. The Constitution and the statute, however, both contain a proviso that nothing contained therein shall annul or...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
City of Cape Girardeau v. Fred A. Groves Motor Co.
... ... the authority and power to levy and collect an occupation tax ... on persons and corporations ... Market Street ... Railroad Co., 9 Cal. (2d) 743, 73 P.2d 234; Danville ... Traction & Power Co. v. Danville, 191 S.E. 592, 71 A. L ... R ... ...
-
Fleur de Lis Motor Inns, Inc. v. Bair, 64747
...Memphis Union Station Co. v. City of Memphis, 161 Tenn. 203, 208, 30 S.W.2d 240, 242-43 (1930); Danville Traction & Power Co. v. City of Danville, 168 Va. 430, 435, 191 S.E. 592, 594 (1937). Based upon the general taxing authority of the General Assembly, we hold that the Assembly had power......
- Lee v. Moore
-
Westbrook Inc v. Town Of Falls Church
...taxed." See also, Welch v. Henry, 305 U.S. 134, 146, 59 S.Ct. 121, 125, 83 L.Ed. 87, 118 A.L.R. 1142; Danville Traction & Power Co. v. City of Danville, 168 Va. 430, 436, 191 S.E. 592, 594. In the case before us the cost of installing neither sewer was an obligation imposed upon Westbrook a......