Drennan v. Herzog
| Decision Date | 29 April 1885 |
| Citation | 56 Mich. 467,23 N.W. 170 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
| Parties | DRENNAN v. HERZOG and others. |
Error to Saginaw.
H.H Hoyt, for plaintiff and appellant.
D.P Foote, for defendants.
The plaintiff brings ejectment to recover 60 and 91-100 acres of land lying in the county of Saginaw. Plea, general issue with claim for value of improvements. The plaintiff claims title from the general government. The defendants are in possession of the property, and claim title thereto under a tax deed, given on a sale made for the unpaid taxes assessed upon the land in 1872. The entire tax assessed against the property for the year was $18.40. The amount of the state tax was $1.62. The taxes were all paid except the state tax. The amount for which the land was sold was $1.94, which was the state tax, with interest added for eight months at the rate of 30 per cent.
No question is made but that the proceedings to sale were all regular, and it is not claimed the taxes assessed were excessive. The important question raised by counsel for plaintiff is, could payment of the interest, at the rate claimed, be legally compelled by a sale of the land assessed? The interest amounted to but 32 cents, and it was added to the state tax to make the amount for which the land was sold. The circuit judge held the sale legal and title valid, and rendered judgment for the defendants.
The statute under which it is claimed it was proper to add the 30 per cent. interest reads as follows: "Any person may pay the taxes, or any one of the several taxes, on any parcel of lands returned as aforesaid, or on any undivided share thereof, with interest calculated thereon from the first day of February next, after the same were assessed, at the rate of fifteen per cent. per annum, and the office charges, and four per cent. as a collection fee, to the treasurer of the county in which the lands are situated, at any time before they are sold for taxes, or to the state treasurer, on the certificate of the auditor general, at any time before the twentieth day of September next preceding the time appointed for such sale: provided, that on all taxes remaining unpaid on the first day of June next, after the same were assessed interest shall be computed at the rate of thirty per cent per annum from said first day of February." If the taxes and interest and expenses remain unpaid after the first day of October, the statute further provides that the land may be sold to pay the same, under the direction of the auditor general, in the mode and manner therein pointed out. See statute, �� 77-88, (1 Comp.Laws 1871, c. 21.)
The right of imposing taxes, and the manner of levying and collecting them, are matters strictly within the power of the legislature, and the tax-payer has a right to such remedies in equity to prevent their enforcement, if illegal, as are usual in other cases of illegal and unjust proceedings. Irregularities in enforcing the collection will generally be overlooked by courts, but when the action taken by the authorities in levying the tax, or in the efforts to enforce collection, is illegal, the proceeding will be void, and cannot be sustained. The regulation of interest between individual parties for the use of money has always been a proper subject for legislative action, and there is no reason why it should not be such between the state and an individual when its rights are involved. Interest is given for the delay in the payment of money, and whether the sum is owing to the state or to an individual can make no difference. In the case of an unpaid tax, so long as the law is general, it may be for such amount as the legislature may deem proper to determine, and whether interest is given for delay in the payment of money loaned, or for property sold, or for work and labor done, or for a tax legally assessed and past due, is immaterial. The power to require and fix the amount is equally within the...
To continue reading
Request your trial