St. Louis & S.F.R. Co. v. Thompson
| Decision Date | 03 December 1912 |
| Citation | 128 P. 685,35 Okla. 138,1912 OK 818 |
| Parties | ST. LOUIS & S. F. R. CO. v. THOMPSON, COUNTY TREASURER, ET AL. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
By reason of act of the Legislature, entitled "An act to provide for the levying of taxes on an ad valorem basis," etc. (chapter 64, Sess. Laws 1910, p. 109), the county excise board is without power to levy during any one year for township purposes in any township a tax in excess of the amount estimated by the directors of said township as necessary to defray the current expenses of said township during the ensuing fiscal year as approved by the county excise board and an additional amount of 10 per cent. thereon for delinquent taxes. Any tax levied by the excise board in excess of such an approved estimate of the township officers and an additional 10 per cent. for delinquent taxes is, as to such excess levied, illegal and void.
The foregoing act operates prospectively only, and did not have the effect to render void taxes levied prior to the time said act became effective by school districts under the procedure then prescribed by the statute for levying taxes for school district purposes.
Error from District Court, Cherokee County; John H. Pitchford Judge.
Action by the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company against J P. Thompson, county treasurer of Cherokee county, and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff brings error. Affirmed and remanded.
W. F Evans, of St. Louis, Mo., and R. A. Kleinschmidt, of Oklahoma City, for plaintiff in error.
Huston B. Teehee and J. I. Coursey, both of Tahlequah, for defendants in error.
In this case plaintiff in error, St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company, seeks to enjoin the defendants, who are county treasurer and sheriff of Cherokee county, from collecting from plaintiff the sum of $684.65 as a portion of the taxes levied upon plaintiff's property by various townships and school districts in Cherokee county for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1911. Plaintiff contends that the taxes levied are illegal and void, because the same were levied in excess of the estimates made by the authorities of said townships and school districts authorized by law to make estimates of the amount of taxes necessary to defray the expenses of such municipalities for the next fiscal year. The district court in which the action was originally filed granted a temporary injunction, which, on the final trial was dissolved and judgment rendered against plaintiff.
There is no controversy about the material facts. The assessed valuation of all property subject to an ad valorem tax in Park Hill township in said county for the year involved was $691,870. The necessary charges and expenses of said township for said fiscal year, including current expenses, and an allowance for sinking fund and interest, and an additional 10 per cent. for delinquent taxes as shown by the estimate certified by the proper officers of the township to the county excise board, is $1,556; but the excise board of the county levied a tax of 2.5 mills, which produces a total tax in the sum of $1,729, or an excess of $185 over the estimate certified to the excise board of the county. Plaintiff owns property in said township of a total valuation of $252,584. The levy as made by the county excise board creates a tax of $631.46 upon plaintiff's property; whereas, if a levy had been made sufficient in amount only to meet the estimate certified to the excise board, the rate of tax on plaintiff's property would have been .25 mills less, and plaintiff's tax in said township would have been $568.31, or a difference of $63.15, which amount plaintiff contends was an excessive levy and made without authority of law. In school district No. 7 in said county the total valuation of the property was $96,679. The levy made by the excise board was 3.5 mills, which produced a sum of $338. The necessary charges and expenses of said school district for the fiscal year, including the current expenses, allowance for sinking fund, and interest and an additional 10 per cent. for delinquent taxes, as shown by the estimate made by the proper officers of the school district and certified to the excise board, is $290, to raise which amount a levy of 3 mills upon the total valuation of the property in the district would be sufficient; and it is contended, therefore, that the tax levied was excessive to the extent of .5 of a mill on the dollar. The assessed valuation of plaintiff's property in this district is $62,060, and it therefore contends that an excessive levy upon its property in this district was levied in the sum of $31.03. The facts as to the other districts involved are so similar to those of the foregoing mentioned districts that it is unnecessary for them to be set out here in detail. The same principle of law will apply to all of them.
The various levies complained of were made by the excise board of the county under the provisions of an act of the Legislature approved March 17, 1910, which became effective 90 days after its approval (Sess. Laws, 1910, p. 109). Section 2 of this act provides that the trustees or directors of each township and the directors of each school district in a county shall make out an itemized statement of the fiscal condition of their respective municipalities and of the estimated need thereof for the current expenses of each for the ensuing fiscal year, including balance on hand, estimated income from the apportionment from the school fund, based on the distribution of the next preceding fiscal year; also an estimate of the amount necessary for current expenses for the ensuing year, including the amount necessary for a sinking fund sufficient to pay at maturity all bonded indebtedness and all interest on outstanding bonded indebtedness, and that such officers of the township or municipality or school district shall publish such estimate in some newspaper published in the township or school district for four consecutive issues, if in a daily paper, and for two consecutive issues, if in a weekly paper; and, if there be no newspaper published in said district, then a copy of such estimate shall be posted in at least five public places within the district or township, and said estimate shall be certified to the excise board of the county, together with affidavits showing the publication thereof as required by the act.
Section 3 of the act creates an excise board, composed of certain county officers named therein, whose duties it is declared shall be as prescribed by the act.
Section 4 of the act provides that the excise board shall meet at the county seat on the last Saturday in July in each year for the purpose of examining all estimates made to it, and gives to the board power to revise and correct any estimate certified to it, where the amount thereof is in excess of the just and reasonable needs of the municipality for which the estimate was made. When they have approved the estimates, it is made their duty to ascertain the assessed valuation of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial