People ex rel. Maeras v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co.
| Decision Date | 19 January 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 40041,40041 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE ex rel. John MAERAS, County Collector, Appellant, v. CHICAGO, BURLINGTON AND QUINCY RAILROAD CO., et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
Joseph R. Bartylak, State's Atty., Edwardsville, and Burton C. Bernard, Sp. Asst. State's Atty., Granite City (Dick H. Mudge, Jr., Granite City, of counsel), for appellant.
Gillespie, Burke & Gillespie, of Springfield, Pope & Driemeyer, East St. Louis, and Burroughs, Simpson & Burroughs, Edwardsville, (Hugh J. Dobbs, Springfield, James R. Parham, East St. Louis, and Gordon Burroughs, Edwardsville, of counsel,) for appellees.
This is an appeal from 46 judgments entered on April 20, 1966, in favor of 12 railroads for refunds of property taxes paid under protest in Madison County for the tax years 1957 to 1962. The judgments were entered pursuant to the mandate of this court in People ex rel. Musso v. Chicago Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. (Nos. 38859--38904 cons.) reported in 33 Ill.2d 88, 210 N.E.2d 196, wherein orders entered on August 20, 1964, were reversed and the causes remanded with directions.
The orders of August 20, 1964, applied the straight formulaic average of capitalized earnings, market value of stock and debt, and reproduction cost less depreciation, and found that the railroads were undervalued. It directed refunds measured by the difference between the railroads' taxes and the amounts they would have paid if both locally assessed and railroad property had been assessed at full value. Upon review, we approved application of a judgment factor by the Department of Revenue to the formulaic average, found that the record established the railroads' valuations to be at full value, and directed that the refunds be measured by the difference between the taxes assessed against the railroads and the amount which would have been extended had locally assessed property been valued at its full, fair cash value. The trial court was directed to make computation of refunds to the railroads in accordance with the above formula and to enter judgments for specific amounts of refund.
The objector railroads filed motions for final judgments after the consolidated causes were redocketed, to each of which was attached a table showing the amount of refund due each objector, computed in accordance with the mandate of this court. Upon withdrawal of opposition by the collector, the orders of April 20, 1966, were entered which implemented the mandate by ordering refunding in dollar amounts.
Thus, the present unique posture of the case is an appeal from the trial court's second set of orders to which no objection was made and the accuracy of which was not then, and is not now, questioned.
Appended to, and made a part of, the collector's brief is a motion to consolidate the record in the first appeal (Nos. 38859--38904 cons.), together with the abstracts, the People's two briefs, the railroads' three...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
PSL Realty Co. v. Granite Inv. Co.
...239 Ill. 111, 87 N.E. 872.) The trial court may only do those things directed in the mandate. (People ex rel. Maeras v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R.R. Co. (1967), 36 Ill.2d 585, 224 N.E.2d 248, dismissed (1967), 389 U.S. 427, 88 S.Ct. 578, 19 L.Ed.2d 655; Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese......
-
Kazubowski v. Kazubowski
...when a question sought to be raised the second time around is of a constitutional nature. (People ex rel. Maeras v. Chicago, Burlington and Quincy R.R. Co., 36 Ill.2d 585, 588, 224 N.E.2d 248.) In such a case it is presumed that appellant has no objections to urge against the record except ......
-
Yonan v. Oak Park Federal Sav. and Loan Ass'n, 44342
...National Builders Bank of Chicago et al., 12 Ill.2d 473, 147 N.E.2d 42, 1957; People ex rel. Maeras, County Collector v. Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Railroad Co. et al., 36 Ill.2d 585, 224 N.E.2d 248, 1967.) In regards to whether a binding and enforceable contract had been entered into t......
-
People v. Gaston
...Community Unit School District No. 8 (1991), 223 Ill.App.3d 412, 165 Ill.Dec. 616, 584 N.E.2d 1050; People v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. (1967), 36 Ill.2d 585, 224 N.E.2d 248.) The supreme court's order vacating defendant's acquittal and reinstating defendant's conviction did......