People v. Jennings

• Decision Date: 24 May 1954
• Docket Number: No. 33090,33090
• Parties: PEOPLE v. JENNINGS.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

Page 781

119 N.E.2d 781

3 Ill.2d 125

PEOPLE v. JENNINGS.

No. 33090.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

May 24, 1954.

J. D. Quarant, Elizabethtown, for appellant.

James G. Gullett, State's Atty., Elizabethtown, for appellee.

KLINGBIEL, Justice.

On March 2, 1953, the People, by the State's Attorney, brought an action in the county court of Hardin County against Lloyd Jennings to recover personal property taxes for the year 1951. From a judgment against him defendant appeals directly to this court, the revenue being involved.

It appears from the pleadings and evidence that appellant was the owner of certain personal property in the county subject to taxation; that he filed a verified schedule of such personal property and was assessed thereon; and that the tax extended against him was not paid. It further appears that for the year 1951 the list of personal property assessments was not published in a newspaper as required by section 103 of the Revenue Act of 1939. (Ill.Rev.Stat.1949, chap. 120, par. 584.) The sole question presented is whether the failure to publish the assessment list is a valid objection to collection of the tax.

The question is one of statutory construction. Its determination must depend upon whether the requirements of the statute, which were not complied with, are mandatory or merely directory in nature. The applicable rule was announced in French v. Edwards, 13 Wall. 506, 80 U.S. 506, 20 L.Ed. 702, where the court observed: 'There are, undoubtedly, many statutory requisitions intended for the guide of officers in the conduct of business devolved upon them, which do not limit their power or render its exercise in disregard of the requisitions ineffectual. Such, generally, are regulations designed to secure order, system and dispatch in proceedings, and by a disregard of which the rights of parties interested cannot be injuriously affected. Provisions of this character are not usually regarded as mandatory unless accompanied by negative words importing that the acts required shall not be done in any other manner or time than that designated. But when the requisitions prescribed are intended for the protection of the citizen, and to prevent a sacrifice of his property, and by a disregard of which his rights might be and generally would be injuriously affected, they are not directory but mandatory. They must be followed or the acts done will be invalid. The power of the officer in all such cases is limited by the manner and conditions prescribed for its exercise.'

Lyon v. Alley, 130 U.S. 177, 9 S.Ct. 480, 483, 32 L.Ed. 899, involved construction of a statute requiring a commissioner of improvements to deposit the assessment roll with the 'register,' who was then required to 'place in the hands of the collector of taxes a list of the persons chargeable with such tax, together with the amount due by each person.' The statute further provided that within ten days after receiving such list the collector shall give notice in writing to each taxpayer. In holding that the requirements were intended to be mandatory, the court declared: 'The provisions of statutes as to the form and mode of assessments, as to tax-lists, and the place where the tax-lists are to be deposited, are, according to the highest authority, designed for the benefit of the tax-payers, and the protection of their property from sacrifice.'

In Heidenway v. Harding, 336 Ill. 606, 168 N.E. 630, 632, this court pointed out that 'Every taxpayer, under the Constitution and laws of this state, has a right to notice when his property is assessed for taxation, with an opportunity to be heard upon the justness of the taxation. To this end statutory provisions are made for such notice and hearing. These provisions are for the protection of the taxpayer, they are mandatory, they must be strictly complied with, and a disregard of them will render the tax illegal.'

Section 103 ordains that the appropriate officer 'shall publish the assessment of personal property in full' in some public newspaper on or before July 10. While the legislature has not declared that a failure to do so shall render the tax invalid, such result must, in the absence of any other indication of legislative intent, follow from the character of the requirement. Publication of the assessment roll is clearly not designed for the guidance of officers or the maintenance of order, system and dispatch in proceedings. Its purpose, like that of provisions concerning notice, is to afford the taxpayer information and an opportunity to ascertain whether the assessment is excessive or disproportionate. In view of its nature, therefore, the requirement is prima facie mandatory rather than directory, and failure to comply will vitiate the tax unless a contrary legislative intent is otherwise manifested.

Prior to 1941 this question of effect was expressly answered by the General Assembly in section 106 of the Revenue Act of 1939, (Ill.Rev.Stat.1939, chap. 120, par. 587), which declared in part that 'In case any assessment is not published in conformity with law or is not mailed in accordance with the provisions of this Act, the failure so to publish the same or mail the same shall not be considered as a valid objection to the tax.' Where such a provision...