Freeman v. State

• Decision Date: 23 June 1897
• Citation: 115 Ala. 208,22 So. 560
• Parties: FREEMAN v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

22 So. 560

115 Ala. 208

FREEMAN v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 23, 1897

Appeal from circuit court, Baldwin county; William S. Anderson Judge.

Freeman & Washburn appealed to the circuit court from a decision of the board of equalization of Baldwin county declaring them liable for the taxes on the timber on certain land owned by the Perdido Land Company. The state filed a complaint in said court, alleging that the assessment was incorrect, in that if failed to assess any valuation on the alleged timber interest of said firm in such land, and that the fair market value of said interest was $20,570. On such complaint, Freeman &amp Washburn took issue. From a judgment in favor of the state Thomas Freeman, surviving partner of said firm, appeals. Affirmed.

Frank Stone, Jr., and Charles L. Bromberg, Jr., for appellant.

Wm. C Fitts, Atty. Gen., for the State.

HARALSON J.

The Code of 1886 (section 453, subd. 1) provides for the assessment of each piece, parcel, tract, or lot of land in this state for taxes, "and every separate, or special interest in any land, such as mineral, timber or other interest, when such interest is owned by a person other than the owner of the surface or soil."

The tax assessor of Baldwin county assessed against Freeman & Washburn, of which firm the appellant is the surviving partner, for the year 1896, the "timber on all sections" (naming them) at a valuation of $20,570. On the 2d of June, 1896, said parties appeared before the board of equalization of the county, "and alleged that they did not own the above described timber, but had only a lease of it for a term of years, and were not therefore liable for the taxes upon the same." After hearing the cause, the board decided that said parties were liable for the taxes thereon, to the amount of $205.70. From this decision they appealed to the circuit court.

The state by its solicitor filed its complaint in said circuit court, alleging that the assessment returned by the assessor was incorrect, in that if failed to assess any valuation upon the alleged timber interest of said parties in the lands described in the assessment, and that the fair market value of said timber interest was $20,570.

Upon this complaint the defendants took issue, and pleaded, specially, that they were not the owners of the property described in the complaint, but that it was the property of the Perdido Land Company.

The averments of the complaint were fully established by the evidence. The assessment on its face shows, that it was the timber on all the lands described, as contradistinguished from a mere timber interest, which was valued and assessed by the assessor. The proof showed that it was a timber interest in said lands,-which attached to all saw logs of certain dimensions,-and not all the timbers thereon, of every kind in which said parties had an interest; and that the assessor had failed to assess any valuation upon the interest of said firm in the timber on the lands described. It further showed that the fair market value of said timber interest was $20,570, and that the board of equalization had assessed such timber interest at that sum. On this aspect of the case, the evidence fully justifies the general charge for the state. This, however, was not the...