Harper v. Davis
| Decision Date | 02 May 1944 |
| Docket Number | 14778. |
| Citation | 30 S.E.2d 481,197 Ga. 762 |
| Parties | HARPER v. DAVIS, Tax Assessor, et al. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Rehearing Denied June 9, 1944.
Syllabus by the Court.
1. Art 7, sec. 2, par. 7 of the constitution of this State, as amended in 1937, declares: Ga.L.1937, p. 1122; Ga.Code Ann.1943, Pocket Part, § 2-5008.
(a) In the instant case, the appeal from the action of the board of tax assessors, disallowing a claim of homestead exemption showed upon its face that the property claimed as exemption included at least one building which was not occupied by the applicant as a residence, and was therefore not exempt from taxation as a homestead or residence.
(b) The fact that the entire property claimed as exempt was assessed at only $1,550, which is less than the maximum exemption allowable under the Constitution, did not entitle the applicant to an exemption, where she did not show the separate value of the property actually occupied by her as a residence, nor give any data by which it could be ascertained.
(c) Under the preceding rulings, the appeal as amended did not reasonably comply with requirements of the Constitution itself as to what should be shown in claiming an exemption, and consequently no decision is required as to the validity of statutes under which the applicant alleged that the board of tax assessors acted in disallowing her claim.
2. The failure of the board of tax assessors to disallow the claim for exemption until the applicant had paid the amount of taxes otherwise due did not relieve her from paying taxes on the amount finally disallowed as an exemption; the exemption being claimed for the years 1941 and 1942, and approved by the tax receiver, but disallowed by the tax assessors in 1943.
(a) There is no merit in the contention that the taxing authorities were estopped by such delay.
(b) The appeal as amended was properly dismissed on general demurrer.
Mrs. Nancy Haper excepted to a judgment of the superior court, sustaining a general demurrer and dismissing her appeal, as filed in that court and as later amended, in which she asserted a homestead exemption for the years 1941 and 1942, after the disallowance of her claim by the board of tax assessors, which claim had been made under the pertinent amendment to the Constitution as ratified on June 8, 1937. Ga.L.1937, p. 1122; Ga.Code Ann.1943 Pocket Part, § 2-5008, Const. art. 7, § 2, par. 7.
In the original appeal, it was alleged
After several amendments, the appeal, as finally amended contained the following allegations:
Appellant 'is informed and believed that defendants have heretofore allowed and passed her a partial homestead exemption on a portion of said property or one of said dwellings in the said years of 1941 and 1942, as the law contemplated, but that now since the war and the loss of revenue, the said board arbitrarily seeks to set aside its former action, of which she had no notice at all or within time to act thereupon as the law contemplates and provides, and this court should enjoin them from so doing, after they have so acted and after she has paid her taxes for said years, she having applied for said exemption and paid her taxes with full notice and ample time and opportunity to said defendant to act seasonably and within the time contemplated by law and good conscience and equity * * *.' There is no board of tax appeals in Fulton County, and no taxes have accrued which applicant has not paid. She has owned and resided at said location since the autumn of 1919; and 'said property is occupied primarily as dwellings; * * * same is her actual domicile and legal residence and her permanent home, and she owns and maintains the same as such and at times with others of her family who are morally dependent upon her for care, protection, and shelter.'
In one amendment, she attacked as unconstitutional several sections of the act approved December 16, 1937, Ga.L. Ex.Sess. 1937-1938, p. 145, as to the method of determining homestead exemptions; and parts of later acts relating to the same subject. Ga.L.1939, p. 99; Ga.L.1943, p. 101.
Chas. W. Anderson of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
E. Harold Sheats and Standish Thompson, both of Atlanta, for defendants in error.
1. The court did not err in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v. Merchants and Farmers Bank of Milledgeville, s. 25926
...34 Ga. 309(3); McGill v. Osborne, 131 Ga. 541(2), 62 S.E. 811; Sumter County v. Allen, 193 Ga. 171, 173, 17 S.E.2d 567; Harper v. Davis, 197 Ga. 762, 765, 30 S.E.2d 481'. State Highway Department v. Noble, 220 Ga. 410, 414, 139 S.E.2d 318, 322. In view of the prior ruling of the trial court......
-
Lively v. Grinstead
...their determination is necessary to a disposition of the case. Sumter County v. Allen, 193 Ga. 171, 173, 17 S.E.2d 567; Harper v. Davis, 197 Ga. 762, 765, 30 S.E .2d 481; Powers v. Wren, 198 Ga. 316(3), 31 S.E.2d 713; Hutchins v. Candler, 209 Ga . 415, 416, 73 S.E.2d 191; Aiken v. Richardso......
-
Weathers v. Stith, 21240
...184 Ga. 316, 191 S.E. 250; Lee v. State, 184 Ga. 327, 191 S.E. 256; Sumter County v. Allen, 193 Ga. 171, 17 S.E.2d 567; Harper v. Davis, 197 Ga. 762, 30 S.E.2d 481; Fletcher v. Daniels, 211 Ga. 403, 86 S.E.2d Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur. ...
-
State Highway Dept. v. Hatcher, s. 21725
...Tea Co. v. City of Columbus, 189 Ga. 458, 465, 6 S.E.2d 320; Sumter County v. Allen, 193 Ga. 171, 173, 17 S.E.2d 567; Harper v. Davis, 197 Ga. 762, 765, 30 S.E.2d 481. Judgement affirmed on the main bill of exceptions; cross-bill All the Justices concur, except DUCKWORTH, C. J., and CANDLER......