Gibson v. Cooley

• Decision Date: 07 February 1906
• Citation: 105 N.W. 1011,129 Iowa 529
• Parties: GIBSON, COUNTY TREASURER, v. COOLEY.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

129 Iowa 529

105 N.W. 1011

GIBSON, COUNTY TREASURER,

v.COOLEY.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Feb. 7, 1906.

Appeal from District Court, Jackson County; J. W. Bolinger, Judge.

The opinion states the case. Reversed.

C. M. Thomas and W. H. Palmer, for appellant.

W. C. Gregory, for appellee.

WEAVER, J.

On January 1, 1901, the appellee was a resident of Jackson county, Iowa. He had formerly resided in Jones county, Iowa, where a few months previous he had entered into a contract for the sale of his farm for the sum of about $11,000, the sale to be consummated on March 1, 1901, by delivery of a deed to the purchaser and of notes and mortgages by the purchaser to secure the deferred payments. The assessor of the taxing district in Jackson county where appellee resided made no assessment to him of moneys and credits. At the first meeting of the board of equalization, appellee's assessment was increased by charging him with $11,000 in moneys and credits, but at a subsequent meeting upon objection being raised to such increase it was ordered by the board that the “raise of $11,000 on Eldad Cooley be remitted, he not having notes, until March 1, 1901.” On April 12, 1904, the appellant as county treasurer of Jackson county served written notice on appellee to appear before him and show cause why he should not be assessed on moneys and credits to the amount of $11,000 omitted from the assessment of 1901. On the day named the appellee appeared at the treasurer's office, but raised no objections to the proposed assessment other than an oral objection of some character to the form or substance of the notice which had been given him. The hearing was thereupon continued to April 25, 1904, at which time the appellee did not appear, and the treasurer assessed to him the sum of $11,000 for moneys and credits omitted from the assessment for 1901. From this assessment the defendant appealed to the district court, where he filed an answer or objection to the finding of the county treasurer, on the following grounds: (1) That appellee did not have and was not chargeable with any taxable moneys and credits for the year 1901; and (2) that the matter of the assessment of said alleged moneys and credits had been adjudicated by the local board of review for the said year 1901. The appellants move to strike the said objections because it does not appear that they were raised in any manner before the treasurer at or before the time when the assessment was made by that officer. This motion was not ruled upon by the trial court, and evidence was introduced tending to show a state of facts substantially as hereinbefore cited. The court found for the defendant, and the plaintiff has appealed to this court.

As we view the record the question decisive of this appeal is one of practice only. Was it incumbent upon the taxpayer to make known to the treasurer in some form the nature of his objections to the proposed assessment in order to have the benefit thereof on appeal? Or can he withhold the issue he proposes to raise and present it for the first time on appeal in the district court? The statute is not specific in its requirements in this respect, and it is quite evident that the Legislature did not intend to invest the procedure before the county treasurer with all the formalities which pertain to an action in court, yet the hearing partakes somewhat of a judicial nature. The statute expressly provides for service upon the property owner of the “time and place where objection to the proposed listing and assessment may be made.” Laws 28th Gen. Assem. 1900, p. 34, c. 50, § 1. This implies the right of the property owner to appear and make known his objections and the duty of the treasurer to consider and pass upon the same....