Havana American Company v. Board of Assessors
| Decision Date | 01 January 1900 |
| Docket Number | 13,688 |
| Citation | 105 La. 471,29 So. 938 |
| Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
| Parties | HAVANA AMERICAN COMPANY v. BOARD OF ASSESSORS ET ALS |
Rehearing refused.
APPEAL from the Civil District Court, Parish of Orleans -- Ellis, J.
Dinkelspiel & Hart (Edward Dinkelspiel of counsel), for Plaintiff Appellee.
Edward K. Skinner, for Board of Assessors, Defendants, Appellants.
Francis C. Zacharie, for State Tax Collector, Defendant, Appellant.
MONROE J. PROVOSTY, J., takes no part, this case having been submitted prior to his taking his seat on this bench.
Plaintiff sued in the District Court to annul an assessment, upon merchandise and machinery, for State and city taxes for the year 1900, upon the following grounds, as stated in its petition, to wit:
"That, under the Constitution of 1879, as amended in 1888 by virtue of joint resolution No. 92 of 1886, said property was exempted from taxation for a period of twenty years; that the first year in which said exemption was made was the year 1881, the taxes for 1880 having been paid on said property; that, therefore, said exemption does not expire until the year 1900, inclusive, only after which date can property exempted, because used for manufacturing purposes, from municipal taxation, be assessed for State taxes; that petitioner made due demand upon said Board of Assessors to erase said null and void assessment without avail; that petitioner is entitled to the cancellation of said taxes for the reasons above stated."
The case as against the city of New Orleans was discontinued, but judgment by default was entered and confirmed against the Board of Assessors and the State tax collector with respect to the State tax, and those defendants have appealed.
When the case was called for argument the counsel for the plaintiff suggested that the appeal should be dismissed, under Art. 897 C. P., because of the failure of the appellants to file an assignment of errors. The transcript is certified by the clerk as containing all the evidence adduced on the trial, and the grounds upon which the defendants rely for a reversal of the judgment are apparent upon the face of the record. It has been held that Article 897 of the Code of Practice does not apply in such a case. Nott et als. vs. Brander et als., 14 La. 370; Waters, Camden & Co. vs. Briscoe, 11 Ann. 639; Bossier vs. Carradine, 18 Ann. 261; Keller vs. Judson, 18 Ann. 282; State of Louisiana (Hubert Gerard, Relator), vs. Adam Giffen, Treasurer, et als., 15 Ann. 420.
On the merits; the proposition of the learned counsel is, that the property in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bayou Bridge Pipeline, LLC v. 38.00 Acres
...errors is necessary. Bossier v. Caradine, 18 La.Ann. 261 (1866) ; In re Fazende, 35 La.Ann. 1145 (1883) ; Havana American Co. v. Board of Assessors, 105 La. 471, 29 So. 938 (1901).In Mayo v. Nissan Motor Corp. in U.S.A., 93-852 (La.App. 3 Cir. 6/22/94), 639 So.2d 773, 792,writ granted and r......
-
93-852 La.App. 3 Cir. 6/22/94, Mayo v. Nissan Motor Corp. in U.S.A.
...of errors is necessary. Bossier v. Caradine, 18 La.Ann. 261 (1866); In re Fazende, 35 La.Ann. 1145 (1883); Havana American Co. v. Board of Assessors, 105 La. 471, 29 So. 938 (1901). [93-852 La.App. 3 Cir. 3] Code of Practice of 1970, Art. 896 provided that if the copy of the record brought ......
-
Rider v. Priola Constr. Corp.
...of errors is necessary. Bossier v. Carradine, 18 La.Ann. 261 (1866); In re Fazende, 35 La.Ann. 1145 (1883); Havana American Co. v. Board of Assessors, 105 La. 471, 29 So. 938 (1901). ....Source: Fed.Rule 75(d); cf. C.P. Arts. 896, 897. As Judge Culpepper noted in his dissent in Mayo v. Niss......
- State v. Hayes