St. Louis & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Epperson

Decision Date04 February 1889
Citation97 Mo. 300,10 S.W. 478
CourtMissouri Supreme Court
PartiesST. LOUIS & S. F. RY. CO. v. EPPERSON, Tax Collector.

Appeal from circuit court, Laclede county; W. I. WALLACE, Judge.

John O'Day, for appellant. Nixon, Quinn & Bradfield, for respondent.

SHERWOOD, J.

In September, 1883, the citizens of Laclede county, desiring to raise a fund with which to construct a court-house, presented to the county court a petition asking for an election to be held for the purpose of voting upon a proposition to incur an indebtedness of the county for such purpose. The order was made in September, and the election held in November. The order for this election did not specify the amount of indebtedness which it was proposed to incur, nor was it specified in the notice thereof which was given as required by law, or in the ballots used by the electors participating in the election.

At the December term, 1883, of the county court, it was ordered by the court that a levy of 30 cents on the $100 valuation be made for three successive years for the purpose of raising funds to erect a court-house; but no indebtedness therefor was ever incurred. On June 4, 1884, the county court of Laclede county made the regular annual order levying taxes upon all property other than railroads. In July, 1884, John Kellerman, who was a deputy in the county clerk's office, without any order or authorization by the county court, made out a pretended railroad tax-book, and extended thereon taxes against the property of appellant at such rate as he was assured by the county officers would be paid by it, and, after doing so, delivered the same to the collector.

In the following December, the representative of plaintiff, having gone to Laclede county for the purpose of paying such taxes as were due, discovered that no order of the county court levying taxes against its property had ever been made; whereupon a special session of the county court was called, which, on the 19th of December, levied taxes against the plaintiff for state, county, school, and municipal purposes, and among the other taxes levied was one of 30 cents on the $100 valuation as a "court-house tax," and which was in addition to and in excess of the regular authorized levy of 50 cents on the $100 valuation for county purposes. All taxes other than the one last named were paid by the company immediately after the levy was made, and payment of the latter was refused. The collector, defendant here, was repeatedly notified that the tax was unconstitutional, illegal, and void.

On the 16th day of July, 1885, the plaintiff owned in Laclede county more than 2,000 acres of land. It had piled upon its right of way through the county a great number of ties, was possessed of considerable personal property situated in said county, and had standing upon its side tracks at Lebanon empty cars worth from $3,000 to $10,000. Notwithstanding the presence of this property which could have been levied upon by defendant, he, by the order and direction of the county court and his attorneys herein, seized a freight train loaded with live-stock and perishable property, chained the same to the track, and detained it from 10 o'clock in the morning until 5 o'clock in the afternoon of the same day, causing the entire movement of trains on plaintiff's road to be demoralized, great loss to ensue to it and its patrons, and much business to be diverted from its road at competing points. Severe shrinkage in value of the live-stock in transit, and material injury to perishable property, was occasioned by reason of the unusual detention. Plaintiff wired the defendant that, if he would release the perishable property held by him, it would run to Lebanon, and turn over $50,000 worth of empty cars in lieu thereof. This was refused; but at 5 o'clock in the afternoon of the seizure the defendant turned over to plaintiff the train in question, upon the latter giving to the former a delivery bond, by which it was agreed that the same should be restored before the day of sale, which had been fixed for the 21st day of July, 1885, and previous to which day the railway company, in compliance with its bond, did restore the train to the defendant; after which time, and on the 20th day of July following, it filed its petition herein asking for an injunction, that the tax be declared illegal, and that it have and recover all the damages which it had suffered by reason of the unlawful detention aforesaid. A temporary injunction was granted; and at the August term, 1887, the case was by agreement heard upon the motion to dissolve the temporary injunction, and also upon its merits, at the same time; when the court dissolved the temporary injunction, dismissed the bill, and rendered judgment against the company for costs, from which it has appealed to this court.

1. In the case at bar, as already stated, the plaintiff sought to enjoin the sale of its property, which the defendant had seized and levied on under and by virtue of the tax-book delivered to him as the collector of Laclede county. Such a tax-book, when properly authenticated, is the warrant under which the collector proceeds in the collection of taxes; but the tax-book in this instance was not authenticated by the signature of the county clerk and the seal of his court, and consequently afforded the defendant no authority or protection for his acts. 2 Rev. St. §§ 6723, 6744, 6754. Hence he must be regarded as a trespasser ab initio. Howard v. Heck, 88 Mo. 456; Ewart v. Davis, 76 Mo. 129; State v. Cook, 82 Mo. 185; Warrensburg v. Miller, 77 Mo. 56, and c...

To continue reading

Request your trial
55 cases
  • Armstrong v. Jarron
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • May 3, 1912
    ... ... Chandler, 32 Kan. 659, 5 P. 170; Lewellen v ... Schooley, 84 Mo. 447; Pike v. Martindale, 91 ... Mo. 268, 1 S.W. 858; St. Louis & S. F. Ry. v. Epperson, 97 ... Mo. 300, 10 S.W. 478.) ... Tax ... sales are made exclusively under a statutory power. Defects ... in ... ...
  • State v. Wood
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • March 5, 1900
    ...Dennison v. City of Kansas, 95 Mo. 430, 8 S. W. 429. The principle was also applied in Book v. Earl, 87 Mo. 246, and in Railroad Co. v. Epperson, 97 Mo. 301, 10 S. W. 478, where the court said that injunction is the proper remedy to prevent the enforcement of the collection of taxes levied ......
  • Austin v. Dickey
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 3, 1928
    ...by the tribunal upon whom it is conferred, and if not so exercised the tax levy is void. State ex rel. v. Railroad, 149 Mo. 365; Railroad v. Apperson, 97 Mo. 300; State ex rel. v. Railroad, 87 Mo. 236. (c) When lands within a legally assessable district fixed by proper authority are entirel......
  • Verdin v. City of St. Louis
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • November 26, 1895
    ...the tax declared void, it being optional with the plaintiff which branch of equitable relief he will seek." See, also, Railway Co. v. Apperson, 97 Mo. 300, 10 S. W. 478; Gardner v. Terry, 99 Mo. 523, 12 S. W. 888. In the last case it is said that "the jurisdiction and power of a court of eq......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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