Spohn v. Stark

Decision Date23 February 1926
Docket NumberNo. 24439.,24439.
Citation150 N.E. 787,197 Ind. 299
PartiesSPOHN v. STARK, County Treasurer, et al.
CourtIndiana Supreme Court


Appeal from Elkhart Circuit Court; J. S. Drake, Judge.

Suit by Samuel F. Spohn against Roy M. Stark, as County Treasurer of Elkhart County, and another. From an adverse judgment, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Howard R. Inebrit, of Goshen, for appellant.

U. S. Lesh, Atty. Gen., and Connor D. Ross, First Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellees.


Appellant, as plaintiff, brought this action against the auditor and treasurer of Elkhart county to enjoin the auditor from placing on the tax duplicate, and the treasurer from collecting taxes upon, a certain lot and building which plaintiff had leased to the state of Indiana as an armory for a company of the Indiana National Guard, and which was being used by such company of the guard exclusively for the purpose of an armory. A demurrer to the amended complaint was sustained, and the plaintiff excepted, and has assigned that ruling as error.

The amended complaint alleged, in substance, that plaintiff owned the lot and the building thereon; that the lot and improvements together were valued for purposes of taxation at $5,700; and that taxes for the current year had been assessed against such property and placed on the tax duplicate by the auditor in the sum of $152.76, which the county treasurer threatened to collect; that plaintiff had demanded of the auditor that he drop said tax from the duplicate; that plaintiff had leased the said premises to the state of Indiana for the term of five years as an armory for a company of the Indiana National Guard, by a written agreement, of which a copy was made part of the complaint, which bound the lessor to install a heating plant and apparatus sufficient properly to heat all of the building, and two shower baths and 45 closet “property shelves,” and to redecorate the interior, and bound the lessee to pay $1,800 per year as rent, with a condition that the leased premises were to be used as an armory for a company of the Indiana National Guard, and for no other purpose. And it averred that, pursuant to the stipulations of the lease, the property was being used exclusively as an armory by the said company of the Indiana National Guard, in a manner stated, and not otherwise, by reason of which facts it was alleged to be exempt from taxation so long as it was so used.

[1][2] The Constitution of the state of Indiana provides as follows:

“The General Assembly shall provide, by law, for a uniform and equal rate of assessment and taxation; and shall prescribe such regulations as shall secure a just valuation for taxation of all property, both real and personal, excepting such only, for municipal, educational, literary, scientific, religious or charitable purposes, as may be especially exempted by law.” Section 1, art. 10 (section 200, Burns' 1926).

And the statute provides that-

“The following property shall be exempt from taxation. First. The property of the United States and of this state. *** Twenty-fourth. That all real estate and personal property used exclusively by the Indiana National Guard or any other military organization of the state for armory purposes, shall be exempt from taxation so long as the same is used exclusively for such purposes. ***” Section 10139f, Burns' Supplement 1921 (section 6, c. 222, Acts 1921, pp. 646, 651).

Appellant insists that the language of this statute embraces his property, and that such property is not taxable as against him so long as it is “used exclusively” as an armory by a company of the Indiana National Guard, notwithstanding he is receiving payment of rent for such...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Tipton Cnty. Health Care Found., Inc. v. Tipton Cnty. Assessor
    • United States
    • Indiana Tax Court
    • February 20, 2012
    ...is not sufficient to show that a lease arrangement will result in private benefit, its status is germane. Cf. e.g., Spohn v. Stark, 197 Ind. 299, 150 N.E. 787, 788 (1926) (finding income producing, rental property taxable when used and rented by the Indiana National Guard) with State Bd. of......
  • Hamilton County Prop. Tax Assessment Bd. of Appeals v. Oaken Bucket Partners, LLC
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • December 15, 2010
    ...property for his own use and benefit,—for his individual profit,—and not for the public good.Id. at 563-64. See also Spohn v. Stark, 197 Ind. 299, 150 N.E. 787, 788 (1926) (finding property used for rental purposes and income production not exempt from taxation "merely because the lessee ma......
  • National Inv. Co. v. Harrison
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • March 11, 1947
    ... ... of a building rented for use as an armory would not be ... entitled to an exemption under a similar statute, see Spohn ... v. Stark, 197 Ind. 299, 150 N.E. 787 ...         The decision ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT