Jenks v. State

• Decision Date: 11 December 1936
• Docket Number: 26366.
• Citation: 188 Wash. 472,63 P.2d 369
• Parties: JENKS v. STATE.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

63 P.2d 369

188 Wash. 472

JENKS v. STATE.

No. 26366.

Supreme Court of Washington

December 11, 1936

Department 1.

Appeal from Superior Court, Thurston County; John M. Wilson, Judge.

In the matter of conveyance taxes paid by the supervisor of banking for the state of Washington. Proceeding by C. E. Jenks, as state supervisor of banking, opposed by the State, for an abatement and refund of certain conveyance taxes. From an adverse judgment, the supervisor appeals.

Affirmed.

Robertson & Smith, Dillard & Powell, and Hart Snyder, all of Spokane for appellant.

G. W Hamilton and R. G. Sharpe, both of Olympia, for the State.

MAIN Justice.

This case arises out of the exaction of certain conveyance taxes from the supervisor of banking in his official capacity liquidating the Spokane Savings Bank.

The facts are not in dispute. Prior to June 15, 1932, the Spokane Savings Bank was a Washington banking corporation. Since that time the assets and property thereof have been in the possession of the supervisor of banking for the purpose of liquidation. Between May 1, 1935, and January 1, 1936, the supervisor of banking and his predecessor in office paid to the state, out of the assets of the bank, certain conveyance taxes in accordance with title 8, chapter 180, Laws 1935 (section 53 et seq., p. 738 et seq.). Taxes were so paid upon sheriff's deeds issued to and received by the supervisor and his predecessor following the foreclosure of mortgages in a considerable number of cases. In none of the foreclosures did the value of the property foreclosed upon exceed the amount or value of the mortgage at the time of the sheriff's sale or the amount bid at such sale and for which the conveyance was made. Other such taxes were paid upon deeds executed by the supervisor and his predecessor pursuant to court order to the assignee of such supervisor's vendor's interest in certain contracts for the sale of real property. The matter was first presented to the state tax commission for an abatement and refund of the taxes so paid. Relief being there denied, an appeal was taken to the superior court, with a like result. From the judgment of the superior court, the supervisor of banking appealed.

Upon the appeal, two questions are presented; first, whether the statute providing for tax on conveyances applies to the supervisor of banking in the performance of his duties as liquidator of an insolvent bank; and, second, if applicable whether the tax is imposed only on the interest or equity of the grantor, and no tax is payable when the mortgage lien equals or exceeds the value of the property. These questions will be considered in the order stated.

Rem.Rev.Stat. § 3269 states the procedure which the supervisor of banking shall follow in the liquidation of an insolvent bank. When the supervisor takes over an insolvent bank for the purpose of liquidation, he becomes, in effect, a 'statutory receiver.' Tharpe v. Gormley, 48 Ga.App. 731, 173 S.E. 212; McDavid v. Bank of Bay Minette, 193 Ala. 341, 69 So. 452. When the assets of an insolvent bank are taken over by the supervisor, they are held by him in trust for the depositors and the stockholders. Lafayette Trust Co. v. Beggs, 213 N.Y. 280, 107 N.E. 644; Mercantile Trust Co. v. Miller, 166 Cal. 563, 137 P. 913. Even though, in the liquidation of a bank, the supervisor is the agent of the state and his possession is that of the state, such property is not exempt from taxation. People ex rel. v. University of Illinois, 328 Ill. 377, 159 N.E. 811; Comstock v. Boyle, 144 Wis. 180, 128 N.W. 870; Wenner v. Mothersead, 129 Okl. 273, 264 P. 816, 817.

It thus follows that the conveyances above mentioned were subject to the conveyance tax imposed by title 8, chapter 180, Laws 1935. In so holding, it is not necessary to determine whether the supervisor, in liquidating a bank, acts in a governmental capacity, because the property ...