Rural Agric. Sch., Dist. No. 1 Grosse Pointe Tp., Wayne Cnty. v. Blondell, 77.

• Decision Date: 03 October 1930
• Docket Number: No. 77.,77.
• Parties: RURAL AGRICULTURAL SCHOOL, DIST. NO. 1 GROSSE POINTE TP., WAYNE COUNTY, v. BLONDELL, Village Treasurer, et al.
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court

251 Mich. 525

232 N.W. 377

RURAL AGRICULTURAL SCHOOL, DIST. NO. 1 GROSSE POINTE TP., WAYNE COUNTY,

v.BLONDELL, Village Treasurer, et al.

No. 77.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

Oct. 3, 1930.

Error to Circuit Court, Wayne County; Clyde I. Webster, Judge.

Action by the Rural Agricultural School, District No. 1, Grosse Pointe Township, agaisnt Neal Blondell, Treasurer of the Village of Grosse Pointe. To review a judgment dismissing the suit, plaintiff brings error.

Affirmed.

See, also, 232 N. W. 375.

Argued before the Entire Bench.William G. Fitzpatrick, of Detroit, for appellant.

Albert E. Meder, of Detroit (Beaumont, Smith & Harris and Joseph A. Vance, Jr., all of Detroit, of counsel), for appellees.

WIEST, C. J.

For many years, the statute relative to the assessment, levy and collection of taxes has provided:

‘The following real property shall be exempt from taxation: * * *

‘Lands owned by any * * * school district and buildings thereon, used for public purposes.’

Compiled Laws 1915, § 4001. Re-enacted in Act No. 331, Public Acts 1919; Act No. 55, Public Acts 1925, and Act No. 118, Public Acts 1927.

In 1925, plaintiff, by condemnation, obtained title to a tract of land in the defendant village, upon which were dwelling houses, intending to use the land for school purposes. At the time the suit at bar was brought the property had not been used for such proposes and the dwelling houses thereon had been let for private residence purposes at substantial rentals. In 1927, the property was assessed for village taxes. Plaintiff asserted exemption under the statute and, after levy of the tax, paid the same under protest and brought this suit to recover the sum paid. Upon motion of defendants the circuit court held the tax valid and dismissed the suit.

The record does not disclose the date of the assessment, and we must assume, for the purpose of the legal question involved, that the tax lien attached before Act No. 319, Public Acts 1927, which consolidated the school laws and exempted the property of school districts from taxation, became effective.

The exemption of property from taxation, made contingent upon use for public purposes, does not extend to a future intended use, but is limited to present use.

The rule is stated in Cooley on Taxation (4th Ed.) § 687:

‘An intention to use property at some uncertain time in the future, for purposes which will render it exempt from taxation under the laws of the state, does not preclude its taxation...