King County, Wash. v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 13 May 1912
• Docket Number: 2,065.
• Citation: 196 F. 323
• Parties: KING COUNTY, WASH., et al. v. NORTHERN PAC. RY. CO.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit

196 F. 323

KING COUNTY, WASH., et al. v. NORTHERN PAC. RY. CO.

No. 2,065.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

May 13, 1912

The appellee filed its bill to enjoin the appellants from proceeding to collect a tax levied upon its roadbed and operating property by the county board of equalization of King county in the year 1907. The injunction was sought on the ground that the tax was illegal and in conflict with the statutes of the state. The bill alleged that the State Board of Tax Commissioners in January, 1906, classified the different railroad properties of the state for the purpose of assessment and taxation for the years 1906 and 1907, and that it did fix the valuation and assessment for the purposes of taxation of different classes of railway tracks as follows All railway tracks classified as first class at $14,520 per mile; all railway tracks classified under first class B at $10,560 per mile; all tracks classified as second class at $7,920 per mile; all railway tracks of third class at $4,752 per mile; all railway tracks of fourth class at $2,112 per mile, and all railway tracks classified as second track at $7,920 per mile. The bill further alleged that the Board of Tax Commissioners gave the various county assessors of the state advice and direction to place the said valuation upon the property of railroad companies for assessment purposes and that those directions were followed throughout the state in the year 1906. The bill then alleges that for the purposes of assessment and taxation for the year 1907 the county assessor of King county listed the appellee's lines of tracks at the valuation as equalized by the county board of equalization in the year 1906, but that in the month of August, 1907, the board of equalization of King county acting at the instance and direction of one of the members of said Board of Tax Commissioners, who claimed to represent the board, raised the valuation of the assessment so fixed in the year 1906 for the years 1906 and 1907 to $25,410 per mile for first-class railroad tracks, and made similar increase of assessment on other classes of the appellee's property and that this was done against the protest of the appellee, which was duly made to said board of equalization. The bill alleges that the Board of Tax Commissioners did not give directions to any other assessor or board of equalization in any other county of the state than King county in 1907 to raise the valuation as fixed in 1906, and that, as the result thereof, the value of the lines of the track of the appellee was not proportioned among the several counties through which its road passes in the proportion that the mileage of each county bears to the entire mileage of the state. It was further alleged in the bill that the property of the appellee had been overvalued in the assessment complained of, as compared with the assessment and valuation of other property in King county; that the appellee's property had been assessed at 30 per cent. of its value, whereas other property had been assessed at but 25 per cent. of its value. This ground for relief was subsequently abandoned, and counsel for the appellee withdrew from consideration in the case that feature of the bill. A separate ground of relief alleged was that for the year 1907 the assessor of King county assessed the appellee's operating franchise, and placed a valuation thereon of $100,000 as an assessment against its personal property, whereas the same had been covered by, and formed a part of, the valuation fixed and assessed upon the operating property of the appellee, the result whereof was double taxation upon the appellee's property. The appellee alleged due tender of taxes on its property in King county as it had been assessed for the year 1906. The answer denied that the classification made by the Board of Tax Commissioners in January, 1906, was made for any other than that year, and it alleged that the county board of equalization of King county, in the month of August, 1907, acting at the instance and direction of the State Board of Tax Commissioners, raised the valuation of the assessment for the year 1907 on all rights of way and substructures and superstructures of the appellee situate in King county. Upon the issues and the testimony, the court enjoined the appellants from further proceeding to collect the tax, and directed that the appellants issue to the appellee upon the payment of the sum tendered a receipt in full for all taxes for the year 1907.

Section 2, art. 7, of the Constitution, required that the Legislature shall provide by law a uniform and equal rate of assessment and taxation of all property in the state, according to its value in money, and shall prescribe such regulation by general laws, as shall secure a just valuation for taxation of all property, so that every person and corporation shall pay a tax in proportion to the value of his, or her, or its property. The Revenue Act of 1897 (Laws 1897, p. 150), in section 32, provides as follows: 'The value of the railroad track shall be listed and taxed in the several counties in the proportion that the value of the main line in such county bears to the whole length of the road in the state, except the value of the side or second tracks and all turnouts, and all station houses, depots, machine shops or other buildings belonging to the road, which shall be taxed in the county in which the same are located. ' Section 34 provides that 'the rolling stock shall be listed in the several counties in the proportion that the length of the main track used or operated in said county bears to the whole length of the whole road used or operated by such person, company, or corporation. ' Section 42 provides that 'all property shall be assessed at its true and fair value in money. In determining the true and fair value of real or personal property, the assessor shall not adopt a lower or different standard of value because the same is to serve as a basis of taxation. ' By the Laws of 1905 a Board of Tax Commissioners was created. Laws 1905, p. 224. Subdivision 2 of section 2 provides that the commissioners 'shall have power, and it shall be their duty to exercise general supervision over assessors and county boards of equalization, and the determination and assessment of the taxable property in the several counties, cities and towns of the state, to the end that all taxable property in this state shall be placed upon the assessment rolls and equalized between persons, corporations and companies in the several counties of this state, and between the different municipalities and counties therein, so that equality of taxation shall be secured according to the provisions of existing laws.'

John F. Murphy and Robert H. Evans, both of Seattle, Wash., for appellant.

Geo. T. Reid, J. W. Quick, L. B. da Ponte, all of Tacoma, Wash., and C. H. Winders, of Seattle, Wash., for appellee.

Before GILBERT and ROSS, Circuit Judges, and WOLVERTON, District judge.

GILBERT Circuit Judge (after stating the facts as...