Draper v. Inhabitants of Hatfield

• Decision Date: 28 February 1878
• Parties: Lewis L. Draper v. Inhabitants of Hatfield
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

124 Mass. 53

Lewis L. Draper v. Inhabitants of Hatfield

Supreme Court of Massachusetts

February 28, 1878

Argued October 5, 1877 [Syllabus Material]

Hampshire. Contract to recover the amount of a tax, assessed by the defendant town on the personal property of the plaintiff on May 1, 1875, and paid by the plaintiff under protest. Trial in the Superior Court, before Brigham, C. J who allowed a bill of exceptions in substance as follows:

There was evidence tending to show that the plaintiff changed his domicil from the town of Northampton to Hatfield, in the spring of 1874, and that he was taxed as a resident of Hatfield for the year 1874, which tax he paid.

The only matter in controversy at the trial was as to the domicil of the plaintiff on May 1, 1875. The plaintiff contended that he moved all of his articles of furniture and other property from Hatfield to Northampton in the early part of March 1875, and that, at that time, it was his intention to change his domicil from Hatfield to Northampton, and that, from that time, he considered his domicil to be in Northampton.

It appeared in evidence that on April 11, 1875, the plaintiff gave notice to the assessors of Hatfield that he had removed from Hatfield and was not taxable in that town in the year 1875, and that on April 13 he went to California, arriving there the latter part of May, and returned to Northampton some time during the month of August of the same year.

The defendant introduced evidence tending to show that the plaintiff's removal from Hatfield was not for the purpose of changing his domicil to Northampton, but for the purpose of inducing the assessors of Hatfield to assess him for a less amount; and offered to show that the plaintiff, after he returned from California, sought an interview with the assessors of Hatfield, and told them that he wished no trouble, and would pay one half of the tax they had assessed upon him, if they would abate the other half.

The defendant also offered in evidence office copies of mortgage deeds, to show that on March 30, 1875, and on April 5, 7, and 30, 1875, the plaintiff took such mortgage deeds from different parties, in which he was described as "of the town of Hatfield;" all of which evidence was excluded.

There was evidence tending to show that the plaintiff intended to evade taxation by the town of Northampton for the year 1875, but intended, on account of his absence on his trip to California, to contend that he was not taxable in the town of Northampton; and he was not taxed by the town of Northampton for the year 1875.

The defendant asked the judge to rule "that if the plaintiff's acts, upon which he relies to show his change of residence to Northampton, were done with a view to evade the payment of taxes in both towns, then they would not avail him in the present action, and the defendant would be entitled to a verdict."

The judge declined so to rule, but instructed the jury as follows: "If the plaintiff's leaving Hatfield was not bona fide with a view of acquiring a domicil in Northampton or any other town; but if he had in view not acquiring a domicil in any town in the state on the first day of May, 1875, then his domicil would remain in Hatfield, for the purpose of taxation, and he cannot prevail in this action.

"If the plaintiff left Hatfield with a view of going to California, without any definite purpose as to where he would settle down, and his stay in Northampton was incidental merely to his journey, and he was an itinerant at the time rather than a permanent resident, then the plaintiff cannot recover.

"If the plaintiff, having had in March, 1875, a domicil in Hatfield, left that town with a fixed purpose not to return or have a home there, and went to Northampton and there resided, with a fixed purpose to have his home there, then and afterward, for a definite or indefinite time, his residence in Hatfield was abandoned and a domicil in Northampton acquired for all the purposes of...