Smith v. Sioux City Stock Yards Co.
| Decision Date | 02 April 1935 |
| Docket Number | 42759. |
| Citation | 260 N.W. 531,219 Iowa 1142 |
| Parties | SMITH v. SIOUX CITY STOCK YARDS CO. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Appeal from District Court, Woodbury County; Robert H. Munger Judge.
A suit by the county treasurer to levy and collect taxes on omitted property passed on by the state board of assessment and review. District court entered judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
Taxation can only be exercised under forms of the law.
Wright & Baldwin, George S. Wright, Addison G. Kistle, and Paul E Roadifer, all of Council Bluffs, and A. W. Johnson, of Sioux City, for appellant.
Milchrist, Schmidt, Marshall & Jepson, of Sioux City, and Davis, McLaughlin & Hise, of Des Moines, for appellee.
F Price Smith was the treasurer of Woodbury county, Iowa. He brought this suit in the district court of Woodbury county against the Sioux City Stock Yards Company, filing his petition therefor on the 31st day of August, 1933. The suit involved various claims over claimed omitted assessments made on corporate stocks held by the Sioux City Stock Yards Company, and machinery and fixtures held by the Sioux City Stock Yards Company. In these cases there is involved a considerable amount of money claimed to be due for back taxes, the amount being approximately $34,000, plus 50 per cent. penalty, with 6 per cent. interest on the entire amount of taxes and penalty, aggregating in all between fifty-three and fifty-four thousand dollars. These proceedings were initiated by the treasurer of Woodbury county, serving upon the Sioux City Stock Yards Company a notice of the omission of the property from taxation, and the demand for payment together with the penalty and interest, under sections 7155 and 7156 of the Code of 1931. The petition was in twelve counts, the first eight of which were on the claimed omissions to list corporate stock in the Sioux City Terminal Railway Company, and corporate stock in the Sioux City Stock Yards Company, and omitting machinery, equipment, furniture, and fixtures owned by the Sioux City Stock Yards Company. Notice was served upon the Sioux City Stock Yards Company on the 28th day of July, 1933.
To the petition of the county treasurer filed on the 31st day of August, 1933, the Sioux City Stock Yards Company filed a motion for more specific statement, asking that it be set out in the petition whether or not an order was received by the treasurer of Woodbury county ordering the cancellation of all the assessments referred to in said petition, and, if so, set out a copy thereof. The court sustained the motion, and amendment to the petition was filed, and that amendment shows an application to the state board of assessment and review in reference to assessments or claimed delinquencies of the Sioux City Stock Yards Company involved herein. This application was filed with the board on the 28th day of August, 1933, prior to institution of suit, by the Sioux City Stock Yards Company setting forth that the proposed assessments by the treasurer were without warrant or authority of law, and, if carried out as contemplated, it would result in double taxation against said company, and taking its property in violation of the due process, actual protection, and just compensation clauses of both State and Federal Constitutions and asked for the fixing of a date for hearing. That the date for hearing thereof was fixed for the 8th day of September, 1933, and due and proper notice of this hearing was ordered sent to the county auditor and to F. Price Smith, county treasurer. That the county auditor, LeMar, and Smith both appeared in person and by their attorneys at said hearing. The hearing was then adjourned to September 20, 1933, and the board thereafter entered an order, which stated: " It is therefore ordered and adjudged by the State Board of Assessment and Review that each of the assessments complained of and herein investigated by this Board, as made by the County Treasurer of Woodbury County and the County Auditor of Woodbury County, as omitted property, be and they are hereby declared illegal, erroneous, and void, and the said County Treasurer and said County Auditor of Woodbury County, and each of them, are hereby ordered to abate said assessments, together with any interest or penalty claimed thereon, and to strike the same from the tax books of Woodbury County, and that the assessments of the property of the Sioux City Stock Yards Company as made by the duly constituted assessor of Sioux City for the year 1933, be confirmed, and said County Treasurer and said County Auditor, or their successors in office, are hereby directed and ordered to change and correct their tax books and records in conformity herewith."
It appeared further that on the 29th day of November, 1933, notice of appeal was served upon the board of assessment and review appealing from this ruling of the board to the district court.
On May 11, 1934, the stock yards company filed in the office of the clerk of the district court of Woodbury county, Iowa, a demurrer in seven counts, raising the question that the district court had no jurisdiction of the person of the defendant or the subject-matter of the action for the reason that the state board of assessment and review had ruled upon and determined this entire controversy, and had ordered the cancellation of said alleged assessments as shown by amendment to plaintiff's petition; that the power of the state board of assessment and review relative thereto was full, absolute, and complete; also raising the question, which was covered by the first count, that this had been adjudicated by the state board of assessment and review; that under and by virtue of the provisions of chapter 329-C2, being sections 6943-c11 to 6943-c36, of the 1931 Code of Iowa, the determination of all matters in controversy was vested in the state board of assessment and review, and that the facts stated in plaintiff's petition and amendment thereto do not entitle the plaintiff to the relief demanded, for each and all of the reasons set forth; and, lastly, that the state board of assessment and review had the jurisdiction and right, power and authority to make said order, canceling and abating said assessment, and to direct the said plaintiff to cancel and set aside said assessments and not to proceed to collect said taxes so assessed. The district court of Woodbury county, Iowa, on the 8th day of June, 1934, sustained the said demurrer and on August 3, 1934, entered an order of dismissal reciting therein, " Now, on this 3d day of August, 1934, the above entitled matter coming on for hearing before the Court, plaintiff appearing by his attorneys Wright & Baldwin, Addison G. Kistle, Paul E. Roadifer and A. W. Johnson, defendant, appearing by its attorneys Michrist, Schmidt, Marshall & Jepson, and Davis, McLaughlin & Hise, it appearing to the court that on the 18th day of June, 1934, the Court made an order sustaining the demurrer of the defendant herein.
And now, at this time, in open court, the plaintiff elects not to plead further and to stand without pleading further.
It is therefore ordered by the Court that the petition of the plaintiff be dismissed and that defendant have judgment against the plaintiff for costs."
From these proceedings in the district court of Woodbury county, Iowa, an appeal was taken by the plaintiff to this court.
The 43d General Assembly of the state enacted chapter 205 which appears in the Code of 1931 as chapter 329-C2, and includes sections 6943-c11 to 6943-c36. This provided that the board of assessment and review should consist of three members appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate, and by section 6943-c13, section 3 of the original act, the persons appointed as members of the board should be such as possess knowledge of the subject of taxation and skill in matters pertaining thereto, and further provided that not more than two members of said board shall belong to the same political party.
In section 6943-c24, section 14 of the original act, the board was given power to establish all needful rules not inconsistent with law for the orderly and methodical performance of its duties, and to require the observance of such rules by those having business with or appearing before said board.
Section 6943-c27, or chapter 205, § 17 of the original act, as amended by chapter 206 of the 44th Gen. Assem., provides that in addition to the powers and duties transferred to the state board of assessment and review said board shall have and assume the following powers and duties: This section has sixteen subdivisions, one being numbered 9a, the others from 1 to 16, inclusive. Among the powers given to the board in subdivision 9a is to correct errors, irregularities, or omissions in assessments of individual taxpayers by adding to the tax list any omitted property or by raising, lowering, or abating an assessment found to be erroneous or excessive. In the same subdivision it is provided that any party aggrieved by the action of the state board may, within twenty days after such action has been taken, appeal from the action of the state board to the district court of the county where the property is situated, by serving on the chairman of the state board a written notice of appeal. Another provision in this subdivision is that the state board shall notify the county auditor or county treasurer of any such corrections or change, and the county auditor or county treasurer shall amend the assessment roll or tax list to conform to the order of the board.
These provisions apparently give to the board authority not only over assessment of the individual taxpayer, but authority to list any omitted property by raising, lowering, or abating an assessment found to be...
To continue reading
Request your trial