State ex rel. Thompson v. Dirckx

• Decision Date: 24 November 1928
• Docket Number: No. 29065.,29065.
• Citation: 11 S.W.2d 38
• Parties: THE STATE EX REL. L.D. THOMPSON, State Auditor, ET AL. v. C.A. DIRCKX, County Clerk of Cole County.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

11 S.W.2d 38

THE STATE EX REL. L.D. THOMPSON, State Auditor, ET AL. v. C.A. DIRCKX, County Clerk of Cole County.

No. 29065.

Supreme Court of Missouri. Court en Banc.

November 24, 1928.

Mandamus.

PEREMPTORY WRIT AWARDED.

Stratton Shartel, Attorney-General, and Smith B. Atwood, Assistant Attorney-General, for relators.

(1) In order to effect equal distribution of the burden of taxation over the State there must be: (a) Equalization of valuations among the counties, which is performed by the State Board of Equalization. Constitution, Art. 10, sec. 18; Art. 5, chap. 119, R.S. 1919. (b) Equalization of valuations among individuals within counties, which is accomplished by county boards of equalization. Art. 3, chap. 119, R.S. 1919. (2) The State Board of Equalization has power: (a) To adjust and equalize the valuation of real and personal property among the several counties of the State. Constitution, Art. 10, sec. 18; Art. 5, chap. 119, R.S. 1919. (b) To classify real and personal property, and to fix the standard of valuation for each class respectively, by which the county taxing authorities must be governed. Sec. 12855, R.S. 1919; Mercantile Trust Co. v. Schramm, 269 Mo. 489, 190 S.W. 886. It has supervisory control over valuations of all property of the State by classes. In the instant case it has made an order in line with its duty, directed to the respondent county clerk who is charged with the duty of executing said order. Secs. 12823, 12815, R.S. 1919. (3) Lawful orders of the county board are confined to equalization of assessments among individuals within its jurisdiction. Secs. 12822, 12855, R.S. 1919; Ward v. Board of Equalization, 135 Mo. 309, l.c. 321; Mercantile Trust Co. v. Schramm, 269 Mo. 489. And even in the equalization of assessments among individuals, the county board is without power to alter or change in any way the aggregate valuation of a given class as fixed by the State Board, but must conform to the standard fixed for that class by said State Board; otherwise inequality in the burden of taxation among counties results. Sec. 12821, R.S. 1919; Mercantile Trust Co. v. Schramm, 269 Mo. 489. The county board is not called upon to make a special order indicating either its acceptance or confirmation of, or assent to the action of the State Board, and being without power to alter or change the same in any way, no reason for such order can exist. It must merely conform its action to such order.

Nike Sevier and Montgomery, Rucker & Hayes for respondent.

(1) Uniformity of taxation requires not only that all property of the same class within the limits of the authority levying the tax shall be assessed at the same proportion of its true value, but that all property of one class shall be assessed at the same proportion of its true value as the property of the other fourteen classes of property into which Section 12855 requires the State Board of Equalization to divide all of the taxable property of the State. (2) If the county assessor deliberately and intentionally assesses a taxpayer's property at a higher percentage of its true value than the great mass of other property in the county, and the State Board of Equalization adopts or raises his assessment, the whole assessment judgment, considered as one judgment, is a fraud upon the overassessed taxpayer and is a denial of the taxpayer's constitutional rights under Secs. 3 and 4, Art. 10, of the Constitution and to the equal protection of the laws under Sec. 1 of the 14th Amendment of the Federal Constitution. Boonville Natl. Bank v. Schlotzhauer, 298 S.W. 29. (3) Sec. 12822, R.S. 1919, gives the county board of equalization authority to reduce the valuation of any personal property which, in their opinion, has been returned above its true value as compared with the average valuation of all the real and personal property of the county. This statute expressly confers jurisdiction upon the county board to grant relief to a taxpayer who has been discriminated against and to protect the constitutional rights of the taxpayer, even though the reduction of his assessment should bring the aggregate assessment of that class of property of the county below the amount fixed by the State Board of Equalization. (4) If the County Board of Equalization can only grant relief to aggrieved and appealing taxpayers by adding the exact amount by which an assessment is reduced to the assessment of some other taxpayer, then in case all the owners of one class of property in the county should appeal to the county board of equalization for a reduction of their assessments from a fraudulently discriminatory assessment, the county board of equalization would have no right to grant any relief to the appellants. (5) Where all of the persons owning all of one class of property in a county appeal from a discriminatory assessment made by the county assessor, to the county board of equalization, and the county board finds such assessment to be so discriminatory as to be fraudulent in character, the county board has the right to grant relief to the appellants whether or not they reduce the aggregate amount of the assessed valuation of all property of that class in the county. (6) The judgment of the county board of equalization, rendered within the board's jurisdiction, is a judgment which cannot be collaterally attacked for fraud. State ex rel. v. Vaile, 122 Mo. 47; Bank v. McGonigle, 103 Mo. 193; Boonville Natl. Bank v. Schlotzhauer, 298 S.W. 736.

RAGLAND, J.

Mandamus. This is an original proceeding wherein the State Auditor and the State Board of Equalization seek to compel the County Clerk of Cole County "to extend ... (on the) assessor's books of Cole County the aggregate valuation of the banking corporations of said county as equalized and assessed by the said State Board of Equalization, and to compute and extend the taxes to be levied against said banking corporations ... upon valuations which, in the aggregate, shall not be less than the aggregate valuation fixed and determined by said State Board of Equalization as aforesaid, and to vacate and annul any and all extensions and computations which have been made by respondent county clerk upon a lower valuation."

The facts out of which the controversy arises are not in dispute. On the first day of June, 1927, the Assessor of Cole County assessed the personal property of each individual bank and trust company in the county by assessing their respective shares of stock. The aggregate of these assessments was $554,336. It is conceded that the assessor assessed the personal property of these banking corporations at what he deemed to be its full cash value, while he assessed all other property in the county, both real and personal, at only seventy per cent of what he considered to be its real value in money. Each of these banks and trust companies appealed from the valuation placed on its personal property by the assessor, on the ground that the assessment was unjust and discriminatory. The County Board of Equalization, when it convened on April 4, 1928, after hearing evidence found that such assessments were in fact unjust and discriminatory in that they were not made on the same basis as the valuations and assessments of other taxable property in Cole County. It thereupon made a blanket order as follows:

"The valuations and assessments of all Cole County Banks and Trust Companies being those listed above are ordered changed to equal seventy per cent of the valuations and assessments made and filed by the County Assessor. The proper officers are hereby ordered to adjust their books accordingly; and collections will be made by the county and city collectors in accordance therewith."

Prior to the making of the order just set forth, the State Board of Equalization, on March 28, 1928, in equalizing the values of the various classes of property among the respective counties of the State raised the aggregate valuation of the personal property of banks and trust companies of Cole County from $554,336 to $630.836 and duly transmitted its order with reference thereto to respondent as County Clerk. Subsequently, on May 16, 1928, the State Board amended its order, thereby fixing the aggregate valuation of the personal property of the banks and trust companies of Cole County at...