People ex rel. McCallister v. Keokuk & Hamilton Bridge Co.

• Decision Date: 03 April 1919
• Docket Number: No. 12498.,12498.
• Citation: 122 N.E. 467,287 Ill. 246
• Parties: PEOPLE ex rel. McCALLISTER, County Collector, v. KEOKUK & HAMILTON BRIDGE CO.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

287 Ill. 246

122 N.E. 467

PEOPLE ex rel. McCALLISTER, County Collector,

v.KEOKUK & HAMILTON BRIDGE CO.

No. 12498.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Feb. 20, 1919.

Rehearing Denied April 3, 1919.

Appeal from Hancock County Court; Eli W. Dunham, Judge.

Application by the People, on the relation of John H. McCallister, County Collector, for a judgment for delinquent taxes, and for an order of sale to satisfy same. Objections of the Keokuk & Hamilton Bridge Company stricken from files, and from judgment and order of sale for taxes, the Keokuk & Hamilton Bridge Company appeals. Reversed and remanded.

F. T. Hughes, of Keokuk, and David E. Mack, of Carthage, for appellant.

Earl W. Wood, State's Atty., of Carthage, for appellee.

CARTWRIGHT, J.

The county collector of Hancock county applied to the county court for a judgment against a strip of land 8 feet wide, described as commencing at a stated point and continuing along the center line of the bridge of the appellant, the Keokuk & Hamilton Bridge Company, 1,567 feet to the state line between this state and Iowa, including the slopes, walls, and embankments, for $3,469.87 delinquent taxes of the year 1917, and for an order of sale to satisfy the same. The appellant filed numerous objections to the application, which in substance were:

(1) That the Keokuk & Hamilton Bondholders' Company, a corporation, owned mortgage bonds of the appellant which were long since in arrears and far exceeded the value of the property, and therefore the bondholders' company was the real owner of the bridge property.

(2) That the appellant was a railroad company and its property was a railroad, which could only be assessed by the state board of equalization.

(3) That the bridge formed a link in connection with various railroads, making a complete line of railroad from points in this state to points and connections with other railroads in the state of Iowa, and was used in interstate commerce, and if sold for taxes the means of interstate commerce would be interfered with and destroyed.

(4) That the United States, as a war measure, had taken charge of the property and was operating it, and a proceeding to sell the bridge would deprive the United States of such control and deprive the United States and appellant of property without due process of law.

(5) That the property was arbitrarily, knowingly, and fraudulently assessed at its full market or cash value, while all other property was assessed by a rule and long custom at about 40 per cent. of its cash value, and the assessment was approved by the board of review.

The court, on motion of the appellee, struck the objections from the files and rendered judgment and order of sale for the taxes. From that judgment and order this appeal was prosecuted.

A motion to strike objections from the files is in the nature of a demurrer, and necessarily admits every fact alleged in the objections and the legal conclusions arising therefrom, and they can be stricken from the files only in a case where no legal objection is stated, and where no proof of the facts alleged would constitute a defense to the application nor justify a refusal of judgment. If any objection states a legal ground of defense, it is error for the court to strike it from the files and refuse to the taxpayer a hearing and an opportunity to prove the fact alleged.Proof that the appellant was indebted and had issued mortgage bonds which were in arrears and exceeded the value of the property and were held by a bondholders' company did not make the bondholders owners of the property or exempt the property from taxation in the name of the appellant.

The...