In re Dennis
| Decision Date | 07 November 1899 |
| Citation | 72 Conn. 369,44 A. 545 |
| Parties | In re DENNIS et al. |
| Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
Appeal from superior court, Hartford county; John M. Thayer, Judge.
Application by Rodney Dennis and others, in the nature of an appeal from the doings of the board of relief of the city and town of Hartford. From a judgment confirming the action of the board of relief, petitioners appeal. Affirmed.
The complaint alleges that the plaintiff Rodney Dennis, as well as each of the other plaintiffs, was on October 1, 1897, a resident of Hartford, and owner of shares of the capital stock of the Hartford Trust Company; that the secretary of said company on October 12, 1897, returned to the assessors of the town of Hartford the number of shares of its capital stock owned, respectively, by residents of said town, and the names of the owners, including the names of the plaintiffs, and $135 as the market value of said stock during the month of September next preceding said October 1st; that each plaintiff duly gave to said assessors a sworn list of his property, including said shares of stock; that the assessors assessed and set in the list said stock at $75 a share; that on October 1, 1897, the capital stock of said Hartford Trust Company was $300,000. divided into 3,000 shares, and the market value of each share during the preceding September was $135; that the capital of said trust company was $405,000; that a portion of said capital was invested in real estate, on which the trust company was assessed and paid a tax; that the amount so invested on October 1, 1897, was $250,000, and the actual value of said real estate was then $250,000; that said real estate was assessed and set in the list of said trust company for the year of 1897 at the sum of $175,000; that said plaintiffs appealed to the board of relief, and the board refused to reduce the amount at which said stock was assessed. The prayer for relief is that the amount at which said stock was assessed should be reduced from $75 per share to $51.67 per share, and for other relief. The court below finds that the market value of the stock on October 1, 1897, was $135 per share, and substantially finds the other facts alleged in the complaint. Upon these facts the plaintiffs upon the trial claimed, and asked the court to rule as matter of law, that the market value, and not the assessed value, of the real estate of the corporation, should be deducted, in due proportion, from the market value of the stock, for the purpose of determining the amount at which said stock should be set in the several lists of the plaintiffs for taxation. The court overruled said claim, and held that the appellants were not entitled to any deduction from the market value of said stock, and that, if they were entitled to a deduction, the assessors were right in deducting the assessed, and not the market, value of the real estate. The appeal specially assigns error in this ruling of the court. The special law claimed as authorizing and defining a deduction is contained in chapter 63, Pub. Acts 1889, and section 3837, Gen. St., which are printed in note.1
E. Henry Hyde, for appellants.
Edward D. Robbins and William J. McConville, for appellees.
HAMERSLEY, J. (after stating the facts). The statute requires the secretary of the Hartford Trust Company, in his return to the assessors, to state the market value of the company's stock during the preceding month of September, and to deduct so much of its capital as may be invested in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Palmer v. Connecticut Ry Lighting Co
...31 Conn. 407, 411. Whatever may be the precise catalogue of all rights of the lessee (Goodwin v. Goodwin, 33 Conn. 314; Dennis' Appeal, 72 Conn. 369, 44 A. 545) and whatever may have been the business and legal reasons for use of the 999 year lease rather than the acquisition of the assets ......
-
State v. Travelers' Ins. Co.
...in the actual value of the assets in excess of existing debts. Batterson v. Town of Hartford, 50 Conn. 558, 561; Dennis' Appeal, 72 Conn. 369, 44 Atl. 545, 1099; and Batterson's Appeal, 72 Conn. 375, 44 Atl. 546. This change as to the valuation of the property and franchise of a corporation......
-
Montgomery v. Town of Branford
... ... rent" did not render the lessee taxable on the land, but ... that the house he had erected thereon was taxable in his ... Leases ... for 999 years we have held to be practical conveyances of the ... fee and taxable against the lessee as owner. Dennis' ... Appeal, 72 Conn. 369, 373, 44 A. 545; Goodwin v ... Goodwin, 33 Conn. 314, 318; Flannery v ... Rohrmayer, 49 Conn. 27, 28. The Tyler lease for 64 years ... was not taxable against the plaintiff as conveying an ... interest in land. It did not convey the fee, nor create in ... the ... ...
-
Citizens' Nat. Bank of Baker City v. Baker County Board of Equalization
...used in the statutes above designated, mean the same thing. Ankeny v. Blakely, 44 Or. 79, 74 P. 485. In the case of the Appeal of Dennis et al., 72 Conn. 369, 44 A. 545, the court construed tax statutes of that state similar those under consideration. The Connecticut statutes provided in ef......