Prairie Oil & Gas Co. v. Cruce
| Decision Date | 09 March 1915 |
| Docket Number | 7024. |
| Citation | 147 P. 152,45 Okla. 774,1915 OK 128 |
| Parties | PRAIRIE OIL & GAS CO. v. CRUCE, GOVERNOR, ET AL. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
The various provisions of the statute (Rev. Laws 1910) and chapter 152, Sess. Laws 1911, relating to assessments levies, extending on the tax rolls, etc., and prescribing the time in which these acts shall be performed, are for the benefit of the state, providing an orderly system regulating the conduct of the taxing officials, and are, so far as they relate to the time within which such duties are to be performed, merely directory, and are not limitations upon the power of the taxing officials.
Where the state board of equalization has assessed property of all railroad and public service corporations, and has equalized the various county assessments and computed the amount of the state levy, and caused the same to be certified by the state auditor to the several county clerks, said state board is without jurisdiction or authority to reconvene and reassess said property, or any part thereof.
If any property, real or personal, of any railroad or public service corporation, be omitted in the assessment of any year or years, and thereby escape taxation, when such omission is discovered the state board may assess such property and extend against the same on the tax list all arrearages of taxes properly charged against it in connection with the assessment for the next or some subsequent year.
The Legislature may make provision by law for a reassessment of property of railroads and public service corporations which has been assessed at less than its fair value, but, in the absence of such provision by the Legislature, no authority exists in the state board to do so.
Where the state board has assessed the property of all railroads and public service corporations, and has equalized county assessments, determined the amount of the state levy, and caused the state auditor to certify the same to the various county clerks, and taken a recess subject to the call of the Governor, and thereafter reconvenes and attempts to reassess any of the property previously assessed, or to add to the assessment already made property which it is claimed had been omitted, prohibition will lie, and is the proper remedy to restrain said board from so doing.
Original action for writ of prohibition by the Prairie Oil & Gas Company against Lee Cruce, Governor, and others, as the State Board of Equalization. Writ granted.
W. S Fitzpatrick, of Independence, Kan., Ames, Chambers, Lowe & Richardson, of Oklahoma City, N. A. Gibson, of Muskogee, and N.E. Van Tuyl, of Independence, Kan., for plaintiff.
Charles West, Atty. Gen., and Ledbetter, Stuart & Bell and Stuart Cruce & Cruce, all of Oklahoma City, for defendants.
This is an original proceeding against defendants, as members of the state board of equalization, praying for a writ of prohibition, prohibiting defendants, as such board, from reassessing property of plaintiff or adding to the assessment previously made the property which it is claimed was omitted. The material facts in plaintiff's petition, which are admitted by the answer, are: That plaintiff on the 30th day of March, 1914, filed with the state auditor a sworn statement of its property subject to taxation in this state, of the approximate value of $31,220,665.33, and on the ______ day of August the state board of equalization raised the valuation thereof to $35,329,904.70, and that thereafter, during the month of August, said board completed the assessment of plaintiff's property, and of all public service corporations in the state for said year, and completed the equalization of all other property in the state, and on September 3d levied a tax for the fiscal year of 1.3 mills; that on the 28th day of August the state auditor certified the assessment so made to the county assessors of the various counties in which taxable property of plaintiff was located, and thereafter said board took recess subject to the call of the Governor; that thereafter, on complaint of one C. H. Pittman, as tax ferret, the board reconvened, and, after various proceedings, on December 10th increased the assessment of plaintiff's property in the sum of $10,500,000.
These facts are admitted by the answer, and defendants seek to justify their action by reason of the fact, as they allege, that the assessment in August of $35,000,000 was induced by fraud of plaintiff in concealing the fact that it had property of more than $10, 500,000 invested in oil and gas leases, and that plaintiff concealed from the defendants the true value of its capital stock, surplus, and undivided profits, and allege that plaintiff's taxable property in the state is approximately the sum of $64,000,000. There is no reply to the answer, and for the purposes of this proceeding the material affirmative allegations thereof are to be taken as true.
There are presented to us for our consideration two questions: (1) If the allegations of plaintiff are true, and defendants were without jurisdiction in the premises, is prohibition the proper remedy? (2) Were defendants, as members of the state board of equalization, without jurisdiction to hear and determine matters considered at the time the proceedings in question were had?
The right of the plaintiff to the relief sought is denied by the defendants; and in support of their position they cite the court to section 7370, Rev. Laws 1910, which is as follows:
Plaintiff contends that the action of the state board in the premises is not governed by this statute, because the board was not legally in session, and therefore clothed with no legal authority, and their acts a nullity. If this contention be true, section 7370 is not applicable, because that evidently has reference to proceedings when the board is legally in session, and the procedure there provided is for the correction of assessments so made. If the defendants were not lawfully in session as the board of equalization, their acts, so far as they affect the rights of plaintiff, would not be governed by this statute, although they may claim to have been acting as public officers in the exercise of some legal duty. The right to a writ of prohibition under these circumstances has been determined by this court in the recent case of Osage & Okla. Co. v. Millard et al., 145 P. 797, not yet officially reported, where prohibition was granted restraining the defendant, as county treasurer, from listing for taxation, or extending on the tax rolls, the property of plaintiff in that case. See, also, People ex rel. N.Y. Edison Co. v. Feitner et al., 45 Misc. 12, 90 N.Y.S. 826; Layman v. Iowa Telephone Co., 123 Iowa, 591, 99 N.W. 205, and cases cited there; Hutchinson et al. v. City of Omaha, 52 Neb. 345, 72 N.W. 218; Cooley on Taxation, p. 1391.
The second question involves the consideration of the various statutes of this state for the assessment of the property of railroads and public service corporations. Section 21, art. 10, Const. (Williams' Ann. Const.§ 286), creates the state board of equalization, and prescribes its duties as follows:
"The duty of said board shall be to adjust and equalize the valuation of real and personal property of the several counties in the state, and it shall perform such further duties as may be prescribed by law, and they shall assess all railroad and public service corporations property."
Section 7373, Rev. Laws 1910, prescribes additional duties for this board, as follows:
"It shall be the duty of said [state] board to examine the various county assessments and to equalize, correct and adjust the same as between the counties by increasing or decreasing the aggregate assessed value of the property or any class thereof, in any or all of them, to conform to the fair cash value thereof, as herein defined, and to order and direct the assessment rolls of any county in this state to be so corrected as to adjust and equalize the valuation of the real and personal property of the several counties."
The manner of exercising the powers conferred upon said board by the constitutional provision above referred to is contained in article 4, c. 72, Rev. Laws 1910, §§ 7336-7349, inclusive. By section 7337 it is provided that the property of all public service corporations shall be assessed annually by the state board of equalization in the manner prescribed in said chapter. Section 7338 requires every public service corporation, on or before the last day of February of each year, to furnish sworn lists or schedules of its taxable property, as may be required by the state board of equalization, and makes such property subject to taxation for state, county, and other public purposes to the same extent as the real and personal property of private persons. Section 7348 provides that the returns so made shall not be conclusive as to the value or amount of said property, and authorizes the state board of equalization to make an assessment of such property at its fair cash valuation, estimated at the price it would bring at a fair voluntary sale, and gives the board power to examine the books, records, and papers and files of any corporation, to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of books and papers so as to enable it to properly discharge its duties in these matters. Section 7349 is as follows:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial