Oregon & C. R. Co. v. Croisan

• Decision Date: 18 June 1892
• Citation: 22 Or. 393,30 P. 219
• Parties: OREGON & C.R. Co. et al. v. CROISAN, Sheriff, et al.
• Court: Oregon Supreme Court

30 P. 219

22 Or. 393

OREGON & C.R. Co. et al. v. CROISAN, Sheriff, et al.

Supreme Court of Oregon

June 18, 1892

Appeal from circuit court, Marion county; R.P. BOISE, Judge.

Suit by the Oregon & California Railroad Company and the Southern Pacific Company against E.M. Croisan, sheriff of Marion county, and Marion county, to enjoin the collection of certain taxes. From a judgment sustaining a demurrer to their complaint and dismissing the same, plaintiffs appeal. Reversed.

Bronaugh McArthur, Fenton & Bronaugh, for appellants.

Raleigh Stott and Geo. H. Williams, for respondent Marion County. Geo.E. Chamberlain, Atty.Gen G.G. Bingham, Dist. Atty., and D'Arcy & Bingham, for respondent Croisan.

BEAN, J.

This is a suit against Marion county and its sheriff to perpetually enjoin the collection of a certain delinquent tax, claimed by plaintiff to be illegal, and comes here on appeal from a decree sustaining a demurrer to the complaint.

For the purposes of this appeal, it is only necessary to state that the complaint avers that the value of plaintiff's property in Marion county, for the year 1891, including congressional grant, roadbed, or track depot grounds, town and city property, and rolling stock, as listed, described and assessed by the county assessor, and approved by the county board of equalization, amounted in the aggregate to $348,927. This property was classified, entered, and described on the county assessment roll, under appropriate heads, as town and city property, other real estate, which included congressional grant and roadbed, and rolling stock. The state board of equalization created by and acting under the provisions of the act of February 21, 1891, (Laws 1891 p. 182,) at its session in December of that year, divided and classified the real property of the state, appearing on the assessment rolls of the several counties, into railroad lands, wagon-road lands, swamp lands, agricultural and other lands not included in the former classifications, city and town property, railroad track telegraph lines, and mortgages, and proceeded to ascertain and determine the rate per centum to be added to or deducted from the assessed value of each class so adopted in the several counties in the state, combining the result of their work in one table, as by law provided. From this table and the complaint, it appears that the portion of the congressional grant of plaintiff in the Marion county, still owned by it, was classified as railroad land, and the assessed value thereof increased about 50 per cent.; that its roadbed was divided into main line and branch line, and the assessed value of the main line increased 42 per cent., no change being made in the value of the branch line, and the value of the rolling stock decreased 10 per cent. The value of all city and town property in the county was increased 10 per cent. The effect of this action of the state board was to increase the taxes of plaintiff, in Marion county, in the sum of $1,589.69, to enjoin the collection of which this suit is brought. Several objections are urged by plaintiff to the validity of the action of the state board of equalization in increasing the valuation of its property, but the principal objection is that it had no authority to divide real property into distinct or different classes, and raise or lower the valuation of real estate by said classes, and to this question we shall devote our attention. The act of 1891 creates a state board of equalization, consisting of one member from each judicial district, each of whom, before entering upon the discharge of his duties, shall take an oath to the effect "that he will equalize all the property, both real and personal, as enumerated upon the equalized county assessment rolls of the several counties of the state." It is made the duty of the secretary of the board to compile abstracts of assessment rolls received from the various counties into tabular statements for the use of the board. In equalizing the valuation of property as assessed in the different counties, the board shall consider real and personal property separately, and add to or deduct from the aggregate valuation of the real, and several classes of personal, property of every county which they believe to be valued below or above the true and fair value thereof in money, such per centum in each case as will bring the same to its true and fair value in money, but shall not reduce or increase the aggregate valuations except in such amount as may be reasonably necessary to a just equalization. The result of the work of the board shall be combined in one table, and the chairman and secretary shall certify to the secretary of state the rate per cent. to be added to or deducted from the assessed valuation of each class of property in the several counties, who shall, within five days, report the action of the board to the several county clerks, and it is made the duty of the respective county clerks to add to or deduct from each tract or lot of real property in his county the required per centum on the valuation thereof as it stands, after the same has been equalized by the county court, and shall also add to or deduct from such class of personal property in his county the required per centum on the valuation thereof, as it stands after the same has been equalized by the county court. The manifest object and intent of this law are to secure justice and equity in the valuation of the several kinds and classes of taxable property, as between the several counties. It is not designed, nor is the board authorized or empowered, to equalize or correct errors in the assessments of individual taxpayers. No such power or authority is conferred upon it by law. The valuation of the property of individual taxpayers by the assessor is conclusive upon boards of review, except as the statute may other wise provide, and such boards cannot change individual assessments, unless expressly empowered to do so. Cooley, Tax'n, 419; Desty, Tax'n. 496; Getchell v. Supervisors, 51 Iowa, 107, 50 N.W.Rep.574; People v. Nichols, 49 Ill. 517; McConkey v. Smith, 73 Ill. 313. The only tribunals known to the law authorized to change individual assessments are the county board of equalization and the county court. Hill's Code, §§ 2778- 2782. After such equalization by the county boards, uniformity in the assessment is supposed to have been secured as between individuals of the county, and it is then for the state board to secure uniformity between the counties. This is not to be done by changing individual assessments, or by adopting some classification unknown to the law, but by adding to or deducting from the aggregate valuations of the several classes of property, as

enumerated upon the assessment rolls, such per centum as may be necessary for that purpose, thereby affecting all property of a given class alike.

The state board of equalization is bound by the classification of property, for the purposes of assessment and taxation, made by law, and appearing upon the assessment rolls. It has no authority to change the assessment rolls or the classification of property as indicated thereon.

The only power it has over the rolls is to ascertain if...