Gray v. Logan Cnty.
| Decision Date | 30 July 1898 |
| Citation | 7 Okla. 321,54 P. 485,1898 OK 55 |
| Parties | GRAY, Receiver, v. LOGAN COUNTY |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
¶0 1. NATIONAL BANKS--Taxation of Capital Stock. Taxes upon the capital stock of a national bank cannot be enforced against the bank, or be made payable out of the assets of such bank in the hands of a receiver. Such taxes are levied upon the shares of stock, as personal property of the holder of such stock, and are recoverable against the owner and holder of such shares of stock, and not against the bank or its assets.
2. SAME--Real Estate Taxes. By the act of congress authorizing the creation of national banks, approved June 3, 1864, (13 Statutes 99,) it is expressly provided that nothing in the act is to exempt the real estate of such a bank from either state, county, or municipal taxes, to the same extent, according to its value, as other real estate is taxed. The claim of the state for the payment of taxes is paramount to the claims of any other person against the property taxed or its proceeds in the hands of a receiver. It is the duty of courts to respect this paramount right, and to make no order for the distribution of assets in custodia legis, except in subordination to such paramount right. There is no distinction between the right of a state to be paid by the receiver the sum of its taxes, and its right to be paid the interest and penalties accrued thereon. The penalties are as much a legal claim of the state as are the taxes upon which they have accrued.
Error from the District Court of Logan County; before Frank Dale, District Judge, on Re-hearing.
John F. Stone and Herod, Widmer & Overstreet, for plaintiff in error.
Huston & Huston, for defendant in error.
¶1 This case was before this court at the June term, 1897; and upon the point involved in Gray v. Stiles, 6 Okla. 455, 49 P. 1083, and upon the authority of that case, the judgment of the court below herein was reversed. As the action of the territorial board of equalization in raising the returned valuation of property in Logan and other counties of the Territory for the year 1895 has been affirmed by this court in Wallace v. Bullen, (decided upon rehearing at this term) 6 Okla. 17-757, 52 P. 954, and the case of Gray v. Stiles expressly overruled, the conclusion of the trial court in this case upon that proposition will not be disturbed, but is affirmed.
¶2 The plaintiff in error is the receiver of the National Bank of Guthrie, and in 1892 was appointed such receiver by the district court of Logan county in the suit of the United States National Bank against the National Bank of Guthrie. Said National Bank of Guthrie was at the time of the appointment of such receiver, and ever since has been, the owner of lots 17 and 18, in block 49, in that part of the city of Guthrie known as "East Guthrie." Said real estate was assessed for territorial and county taxation for the year 1893 in the sum of $ 405.17; for the year 1894, $ 374.48; for the year 1895, $ 354.96; and at the date of the commencement of these proceedings penalties had accrued thereon as follows: Upon taxes for the year 1893, $ 177.69; for 1894, $ 54.48; for 1895, $ 31.94. The capital stock of said bank, $ 70,000, was for the year 1893 assessed at 25 per cent. of its face value against the stockholders; but the aggregate assessed value of the shares of said stock was placed upon the tax roll in the name of the bank, and taxes amounting to $ 835.36 were levied thereon, and at the commencement of these proceedings penalties amounting to $ 369.99 were claimed for the nonpayment of said taxes so levied against said shares of stock.
¶3 On January 25, 1895, the county of Logan filed its motion in the case of the United States National Bank against the National Bank of Guthrie to require the receiver therein to pay all the said taxes and penalties assessed against the said real estate and against the said stock of said bank. The motion was submitted to the court upon an agreed statement of facts, and the court below found against the receiver for, and directed him to pay, the taxes assessed against said real estate for the year 1893, 1894, and 1895, amounting to $ 1,134.61, but refused to order said receiver to pay the accrued penalties on said taxes. The court also directed the receiver not to pay any portion of the taxes or penalties levied upon the shares of the capital stock of said bank for the year 1893. From this order of the court the cause was removed to this court by appeal, and cross assignments of error are presented.
¶4 It is unnecessary to discuss the question of the right to recover, against a national bank, or of a receiver of a national bank, or out of the bank's assets in the hands of a receiver, taxes levied upon the shares of the capital stock of such bank. Such taxes are in no sense the obligations of the bank. Such shares of stock are the personal property of the holder, and taxes thereon are recoverable, as other personal property taxes, against the property of the persons holding such stock. The conclusion of the court below upon this proposition was correct.
¶5 The remaining question in the case is, was the real estate of the bank taxable? And, if so, do the penalties provided by law for non-payment of such taxes run and accumulate while the property is in the hands of a receiver?
To continue reading
Request your trial