Manson Loan & Trust Co. v. Heston

• Decision Date: 12 October 1891
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court
• Parties: MANSON LOAN & TRUST CO. ET AL. v. HESTON ET AL.

83 Iowa 377

49 N.W. 985

MANSON LOAN & TRUST CO. ET AL.

v.HESTON ET AL.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Oct. 12, 1891.

Appeal from district court, Calhoun county; J. P. CONNOR, Judge.

Certiorari to declare invalid the action of the supervisors of the county, as a board of equalization, in raising the assessments of moneys and credits made against the plaintiffs. The district court adjudged that the action of the defendants complained of is illegal, and without authority of law, and therefore null and void. Defendants appeal.E. C. Stevenson and J. C. Kerr, for appellants.

O. J. Jolley, for appellees.

BECK, C. J.

1. The undisputed facts of the case are these: The board of supervisors, pursuant to the requirements of Code, § 821, made a classification of the assessable property of the county, specifically designating certain classes of property and the values to be assessed thereon, and entered an order that “all other property, not herein enumerated, the assessor shall assess according to value, in proportion to the foregoing valuation, which is based upon fifty per cent. of actual cash value.” In obedience to this order, the assessors assessed plaintiffs, respectively, upon money and credits, in a sum specified as to each. Subsequently the supervisors, acting as a board of equalization, for the alleged purpose of equalizing the taxes, ordered, among other changes in the assessments, that 50 per centum be added to all assessments upon moneys and credits in all of the townships. There were various changes made in the assessments of other classes of property, in some instances increasingand in others diminishing the assessed value; but it does not appear that there was any purpose or effort to increase the assessment of any other classes of property beyond 50 per centum of the actual cash value thereof, which the board of supervisors fixed as the rate of assessment, and which we must presume was obeyed by the assessors, and all assessments for money and credits in each township were upon 50 per centum of the value thereof.

2. The action of the board of equalization in increasing the assessments upon money and credits did not, and could not, equalize the assessments upon that class of property; for it was equally assessed in each township. Neither could that action have effected an equalization of the taxes as between other classes of property and moneys and credits, for, as we have shown, we must presume the other classes were assessed at 50 per...