Howell v. City of Dallas, 5678
| Decision Date | 10 March 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 5678,5678 |
| Citation | 549 S.W.2d 36 |
| Parties | Florence C. HOWELL, Appellant, v. CITY OF DALLAS et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
This is an appeal from summary judgment plaintiff Howell take nothing in suit against defendants City of Dallas, Dallas Independent School District and Dallas County.
Plaintiff filed suit against defendants alleging defendants were threatening to sue her for ad valorem taxes on real estate owned by her "which taxes are based on grossly inaccurate, excessive and unreasonable assessments, and based on valuations which are inaccurate and unreasonable and in excess of any realistic salable value". Plaintiff recites the 1974 taxes have been paid, and that she is paying the 1975 taxes into the registry of the court in the total amount being claimed, but "such payment is being made specifically 'under protest' with full reservation of the right to recapture in full any part thereof legally found to be excessive taxation".
Plaintiff prayed for "interim temporary injunction against further assessment or attempted assessment of aforesaid unreasonable valuations for taxes", and for resolution by jury of the reasonableness of the assessed valuations and judgment for refund of any taxes paid on unreasonable valuations.
Defendants moved for summary judgment asserting 1) the taxes have been voluntarily paid by plaintiff, and 2) once taxes have been paid all questions of their validity become moot.
The trial court granted such motion and rendered judgment plaintiff take nothing.
Plaintiff appeals contending the trial court erred in rendering summary judgment:
1) When issues of fact were unresolved; and
2) When plaintiff's averments were in no way disputed or controverted.
Summary judgment is proper only if the summary judgment proof establishes a right thereto as a matter of law. Gibbs v. General Motors Corp., Tex.,450 S.W.2d 827.
It is undisputed plaintiff paid her 1974 ad valorem taxes in full, as assessed; and has paid her 1975 ad valorem taxes, in full, as assessed, under protest. She asserts the valuations on which such taxes were assessed are excessive for which reason the taxes are illegal. She further asserts she paid such...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Camacho v. Samaniego
...Branch Independent School Dist., 605 S.W.2d 688, 690 (Tex.Civ.App.--Dallas 1980, writ ref'd n.r.e.); Howell v. City of Dallas, 549 S.W.2d 36, 37 (Tex.Civ.App.--Waco 1977, writ ref'd n.r.e.). Mutual mistake of law is not a valid ground for repayment of a tax or fee. Gould v. City of El Paso,......
-
Houston Lighting & Power Co. v. Dickinson Independent School Dist.
... ... City of Boyd, Wise County, 233 S.W.2d 603, 605, 607 (Tex.Civ.App.--Fort Worth ... Park Independent School District, 123 S.W.2d 784 (Tex.Civ.App.--Dallas 1938), writ dism'd w.o.j., 133 Tex. 545, 125 S.W.2d 270 (1939) and State ... receive a refund should it overpay its taxes, for which it cites Howell v. City of Dallas, ... Page 309 ... 549 S.W.2d 36 (Tex.Civ.App.--Waco ... ...
-
Hunt County Tax Appraisal Dist. v. Rubbermaid Inc.
...claim for recovery. Austin National Bank of Austin v. Sheppard, 123 Tex. 272, 71 S.W.2d 242 (1934); Howell v. City of Dallas, 549 S.W.2d 36 (Tex.Civ.App.--Waco 1977, writ ref'd n.r.e.). Second, Rubbermaid asserts that the 1982 and 1983 taxes were paid under implied duress and therefore paid......
-
Salvaggio v. Houston Independent School Dist.
...Branch Independent School District, 605 S.W.2d 688 (Tex.Civ.App.--Dallas 1980, writ ref'd n.r.e.); Howell v. City of Dallas, 549 S.W.2d 36 (Tex.Civ.App.--Waco 1977, writ ref'd n.r.e.). The only exceptions to the rule against the recovery of voluntary payments of an illegal tax are (1) fraud......