Seward County v. Jones
| Decision Date | 23 February 1921 |
| Docket Number | 21292 |
| Citation | 181 N.W. 652,105 Neb. 705 |
| Parties | SEWARD COUNTY, APPELLANT, v. HARRY T. JONES, APPELLEE |
| Court | Nebraska Supreme Court |
APPEAL from the district court for Seward county: GEORGE F CORCORAN, JUDGE. Affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
McKillip & Barth and Norval Bros., Colman, Landis & Mastin, for appellant.
Thomas Vail & Stoner, contra.
The question presented by this appeal is whether certain legal rights of the appellee should be designated as "property" within the meaning of the revenue laws, so as to require the same to be listed for taxation for the year 1916. The district court found the issues in favor of the appellee, dismissed the petition of appellant, and granted appellee an injunction as prayed. To review this judgment, appellant has brought the record here.
A brief statement of the facts will serve to make clear the point in controversy. On May 8, 1911, certain creditors of the defunct Capital National Bank of Lincoln, Nebraska, obtained judgments upon their several causes of action, in the district court for Seward county, against certain of the directors of that bank, upon causes of action sounding in tort. The defendants therein brought error to this court, where, on January 31, 1913, the several judgments were reversed and the actions dismissed. Jones Nat. Bank v. Yates, 93 Neb. 121. Thereupon the several plaintiffs took error to the supreme court of the United States, where, on April 3, 1916, the judgments of reversal and dismissal of this court were set aside. Pursuant to the mandate of the supreme court of the United States, and upon its direction, this court, on May 13, 1916, entered an order vacating and setting aside its judgment of January 31, 1913, and reinstating and affirming the judgment of the district court of May 8, 1911. On May 17, 1916, the mandate of this court was entered in the district court for Seward county.
Pending this litigation, Harry T. Jones, the appellee herein, became the owner by purchase of some of the judgments. Soon after the final mandate, Jones received as his share of the proceeds of a sale of the judgments $ 28,050. In his tax schedule, as of date April 1, 1916, Jones made no mention of his interest in the judgments or of the status of the litigation. On June 13, 1916, the county assessor of Seward county, having learned that the judgments had been paid, and that Jones had received $ 28,050, made out and returned an additional tax schedule in the name of Jones, in which he listed, under the item of "Judgments and allowances in my favor entered in any court," $ 28,050.
The question presented is whether, upon the facts stated, the item as returned by the assessor was subject to taxation for the year 1916. Section 6300, Rev. St. 1913, in so far as it applies to the present inquiry, provides:
For the purpose of...
To continue reading
Request your trial