People ex rel. Smith v. Commissioners
| Court | New York Court of Appeals |
| Citation | 100 N.Y. 215,3 N.E. 85 |
| Parties | PEOPLE ex rel. SMITH v. COMMISSIONERS, ETC., OF NEW YORK. |
| Decision Date | 27 October 1885 |
100 N.Y. 215
3 N.E. 85
PEOPLE ex rel. SMITH
v.
COMMISSIONERS, ETC., OF NEW YORK.1
Court of Appeals of New York.
Filed October 27, 1885.
Mr. Man, for the People.
Mr. Dean, for the Commissioners of Taxes of New York.
DANFORTH, J.
The relator, by an order of the supreme court, entered in Madison county, was appointed committee of the estate of one
[3 N.E. 86]
Smith, a lunatic who resided in that county. The relator lived in the city of New York, and its board of tax commissioners assessed to him, ‘as committee,’ the personal estate of the lunatic. Upon certiorari the court, at special term, vacated the assessment on the ground that the estate was not in possession of the relator, or under his control, as ‘agent, trustee, guardian, executor, or administrator,’ within the meaning of the statute, ( infra.) Upon appeal to the general term the decision was reversed. There was no question that the property was liable to taxation; but the contention of the relator is that it should have been assessed against the lunatic at his place of residence. This depends upon the statute, which prescribes the place in which property is to be assessed. The general provision under 1 Rev. St. tit. 2, pt. 1, c. 13, art. 1, § 5, as amended in 1851, (Laws 1851, c. 176, § 2,) so far as it relates to this case, is that ‘ every person shall be assessed in the town or ward where he resides when the assessment is made, for all personal estate owned by him, including all personal estate in his possession or under his control as agent, trustee, executor, or administrator; and in no case shall property so held under either of these trusts be assessed against any other person.’
The relator cannot be regarded as ‘agent;’ for that designation, as we have already held, only applies to one whose principal is a non-resident of the state. Boardman v. Supervisors, 85 N. Y. 359. It is obvious that he is neither executor nor administrator, nor is he assessed as such, nor as trustee or guardian. Strictly, then, the statute has not been followed. It says: ‘When a person is assessed as trustee, guardian, executor, or administrator, he shall be assessed as such, with the addition to his name of his representative character.’ Nor is the style or title by which the relator is described convertible with the statutory appellations. The office of committee is as well defined and specifically referred to in law and in the statutes as that of guardian, executor, or administrator. Each person filling...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reams v. Taylor, 1781
...of a minor. In the former case he is but the bailiff or agent of his ward. (In re Strasburger, 132 N.Y. 138; People v. Tax Com'rs, 100 N.Y. 215; Warden v. Eichbaum, 3 Grant Cas. [Pa.] 42; Mechem on Agency, sec. 48.) Stewart, Stewart & Budge for respondent. RESPONDENT'S POINTS. "The prevaili......
-
Barletta's Estate, In re
...the control and management of his property. People ex rel. Smith v. Tax Commissioners of Taxes and Assessments of City of New York, 100 N.Y. 215, 218, 3 N.E. [2 Misc.2d 140] Jointly owned savings bonds have some of the earmarks of joint bank accounts which may be paid to either joint owner ......
-
Carter v. Beckwith
...he can no longer buy or sell, or enter into any contract or dealing binding him or his estate. People v. Commissioners, etc., 100 N. Y. 215, 3 N. E. Rep. 85; In re Otis, 101 N. Y. 580, 5 N. E. Rep. 571. The incapacity of a lunatic, whose lunacy has been judicially ascertained in lunacy proc......
-
Barto, In re
...28 N.E. 582. The functions of the committee as bailiff of the estate of the incompetent (People ex rel. Smith v. Commissioners of Taxes, 100 N.Y. 215, 218, 3 N.E. 85; Matter of Rasmussen's Estate, 147 Misc. 564, 566, 264 N.Y.S. 231), terminated on the death, and the only matters which are p......