Reynolds Mem'l Hosp. S. v. County Court Of Marshall County.

• Decision Date: 26 September 1916
• Citation: 78 W.Va. 685
• Court: West Virginia Supreme Court
• Parties: Reynolds Memorial Hospital et als. v. County Court of Marshall County.

78 W.Va. 685

Reynolds Memorial Hospital et als.

v.County Court of Marshall County.

Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.

Submitted September 12, 1916.

Decided September 26, 1916.

1. Taxation Property Subject to Taxation Exemptions.

Under the Constitution of this state all property both real and personal shall be taxed except such property as the Legislature may exempt under the exceptions contained therein. (p. 687).

2. Same Exemptions Charitable Property.

Under the Constitution of this state property used for charitable purposes may be exempted from taxation. (p. 687).

3. Same ExemptionsHospitals.

Property used for a hospital can not be exempted from taxation under the Constitution of this state unless it is used for charitable purposes. (p. 687).

4. Same Exemptions Charitable Use.

Whether or not property other than cemeteries and public property may be exempted from taxation under the Constitution of this state, is to be determined by the use to which it is applied. (p. 687).

5. Same Exemptions Charitable Use "Charitable Purposes."

A hospital "not used or leased out for profit," but which, devotes all of the proceeds arising therefrom to its maintenance and support, and deficits caused by expenses in excess of receipts are paid by voluntary contributions, and no profit is sought or received by its owners, is property used for charitable purposes, and may be exempted from taxation under Section 1 of Article X of the Constitution of this state, notwithstanding such hospital is not used exclusively for free patients, but its rules and regulations require payment of such of its patients as are able to pay, according to their circumstances and the accommodations they receive, and that no person has individually a right to demand admission, but all are admitted under certain reasonable rules and regulations. (p. 687).

Error to Circuit Court, Marshall Comity.

Suit by the Reynolds Memorial Hospital and others against the County Court of Marshall County. There was judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant brings error. Affirmed

J. C. Simpson, for plaintiff in error.

McCamic & Clarke, for defendants in error.

Mason, Judge:

This is a proceeding commenced in the County Court of Marshall County by virtue of two petitions filed therein, one by the Reynolds Memorial Hospital and B. M. Spurr and Isabel Spurr, trustees, and one by the Reynolds Memorial Hospital Training School for Nurses, a corporation, asking the said county court to exempt from taxation for the year 1913 eighteen lots of ground, under section 57 of chapter 29 of the Code. The legal title to six of these lots is held by the Reynolds Memorial Hospital Training School for Nurses, a corporation. The legal title to seven of them is held by B. M. Spurr and Isabel Spurr, trustees for Trinity Parish of Moundsville, W. Va. The legal title to the other five lots is in B. M. Spurr individually.

The buildings used by the Reynolds Memorial Hospital are located on the lots held by Spurr and wife, trustees. The Reynolds Memorial Hospital is not an incorporated institution, and there are no trustees, board of visiting physicians or surgeons, or other persons having the care, management and control of said institution, other than B. M. Spurr, who has control and management of the same. The Reynolds Memorial Hospital owns no part of the property mentioned and described in the petitions. The training school for nurses holds title to the lots mentioned therein, but no buildings are erected on them, but they are used for the benefit of the hospital. The lots owned by B. M. Spurr individually are vacant, The record fails to disclose that Trinity Parish, a church organization at Moundsville, receives any benefit from the property conveyed to B. M. Spurr and Isabel Spurr, trustees for such organization. It is admitted in the record that the Reynolds Memorial Hospital is a private institution. None of the property is vested in trustees in trust for charitable purposes.

The county court held that the property was not exempt from taxation. Thereupon an appeal was taken to the circuit court of Marshall County. The judgment of the county court was reversed by the circuit court, and from that judgment of the circuit court a writ of error has been awarded by this court.

If the property is used for charitable purposes within the meaning of the Constitution, then it is exempt from taxation; if it is not so used, it is not exempt. Therefore, there is involved in this case the difficult and perplexing question of determining from the facts whether or not this hospital is in a legal sense used for "charitable purposes." We are not aided by an examination of the conveyances under which the property is held. These conveyances do not limit or in any wise control the grantees in the use of the property. It may be used for any lawful purpose.

The mere fact that the property is used for hospital purposes is not sufficient to exempt it from taxation. Hospitals are not among the property named in the Constitution as exempt. It may however be exempt if it comes within the class of property used for charitable purposes. Then, having in mind that hospital property is not exempt by name in the Constitution, and that all hospitals are not charitable institutions, but may be, and often are, used for profit, the same as any other lawful business, we must determine the character of this hospital from the evidence, and determine whether or not this property is in a legal sense used for charitable purposes within the meaning of the Constitution.

The Constitution of this State, Article X, section 1. requires all property to be taxed except '' property used for educational, literary, scientific, religious or charitable purposes," and that "all cemeteries and public property may, by law, be exempt from taxation." Whether or not property may be exempted from taxation under this section depends on the use to which it is applied, except that "cemeteries and public property," may be exempted by law without regard to their use; they are specifically named, and may be exempted by law. The Legislature, in compliance with this provision of the Constitution, has specified the property exempted. Chapter 29, section 57, Code. That statute among other things exempts from taxation property belonging to "any hospital not held or leased out for profit," In determining the character of this hospital, it is not necessary now to decide what effect shall be given to the words "not held or leased out for profit," as the character of the hospital in this case will be determined by other controlling facts. It will be'observed that by this statute the property of all hospitals is not exempt from taxation. Only the property of a certain specified class of hospitals is exempt, The evident intent of the Legislature is to place the property of certain hospitals in the class of property used for charitable purposes. Does the evidence show that this property properly belongs to the class which may be exempted from taxation because used for charitable purposes'?

We have no difficulty in reaching the conclusion that all of the property was being used for hospital purposes at the time the assessments were made; but it must be shown not only that the property was used as a hospital, but that it was a hospital used for charitable purposes. It is most strenuously insisted by counsel for appellant that...