Lehigh & Wilkes-Barre Coal Co. v. Luzerne County

• Decision Date: 22 June 1909
• Docket Number: 123
• Citation: 74 A. 67,225 Pa. 267
• Parties: Lehigh & Wilkes-Barre Coal Company, Appellant, v. Luzerne County
• Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

74 A. 67

225 Pa. 267

Lehigh & Wilkes-Barre Coal Company, Appellant, v. Luzerne County

No. 123

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

June 22, 1909

Argued April 15, 1909

Appeal, No. 123, Jan. T., 1909, by plaintiff, from order of C.P. Luzerne Co., Oct. T., 1907, No. 614, on appeal from tax settlement in case of Lehigh & Wilkes-Barre Coal Company v Luzerne County. Reversed.

Appeal from tax settlement. Before FULLER, J.

The case turned on whether the court had applied a proper rule in ascertaining the valuation of the coal lands in question.

Errors assigned were in the following form:

I. The court erred in overruling appellant's first exception to the court's conclusions of law and fact, which exception and the ruling of the court thereon are as follows:

1. The court having found in the sixth conclusion of law that "If general custom or practice in a county has established as the basis of taxation not the full selling price but only a certain percentage thereof, this custom or practice, although bad and unlawful, must fix the standard for all, and any particular property, even though it be assessed at no more than real selling value, must enjoy the privilege of reduction to the established percentage;" the appellants respectfully except to the further finding in said sixth conclusion, "but no such fractional percentage can be considered a standard for use in the production of uniformity unless it is general, definite, and fixed by central authority.

"It must apply to the whole county, and not alone to certain municipalities therein.

"It must be an invariable factor applied throughout, and not merely an average obtained by addition and division of sundry different factors.

"It must be fixed by the commissioners sitting as a board of revision and acting upon returns made by assessors in the manner prescribed by law, and not fixed by each separate assessor according to his individual foolishness in fifty different districts.

"It is not enough to show a general practice of assessment below value." Answer: "After further reflection and consideration of able briefs, pro and con, we stand by our former conclusion that the valuation of $2,400 per acre was a just and equitable result, regardless of any possible flaws in the reasoning by which that result was obtained; and we adhere thereto as our finding of fact in the case under all the evidence, hereby overruling all exceptions.

II. The court erred in overruling appellant's second exception to the court's conclusion of law and fact, which exception and the ruling of the court thereon are as follows:

2. The court having found in its statement of facts, "4. The general practice of assessors throughout the county has been and is, and in this particular triennial assessment was, to assess below value," the appellants respectfully except to the refusal of the court to ascertain and find the average rate of assessed value for county purposes. Answer: After further reflection and consideration of able briefs, pro and con, we stand by our former conclusion that the valuation of $2,400 per acre was a just and equitable result, regardless of any possible flaws in the reasoning by which that result was obtained; and we adhere thereto as our finding of fact in the case under all the evidence, hereby overruling all exceptions."

Decree reversed and record remitted with instructions to hear and determine the question raised by this appeal in accordance with the views expressed in this opinion. Costs of this appeal to be paid by appellee.

A. H McClintock and F. W. Wheaton, with them G. R. Bedford and A. L. Williams, for appellant. -- If it is the custom to assess other properties below actual value, then some fair, just and equitable ratio must be fixed by the court which can be applied to the appellant's coal lands.

What is said by this court in the only case we can discover, which has arisen under these acts, allowing appeals, Rockhill Iron & Coal Co. v. Fulton Co., 204 Pa. 44, is most apt and most trenchantly expressed.

Since the foregoing argument was in print, the case In re Assessment of D., L. & W.R.R. Co., appeal from Lackawanna county, was decided on March 29, 1909.

What is there said by Mr. Justice ELKIN is applicable to the position we have maintained that the court should have fixed the valuation of appellant's coal land at the same percentage of actual or market value as was generally the rate of valuation...