State v. Bd. of Com'rs of Hudson County
| Decision Date | 13 March 1901 |
| Citation | 49 A. 9,66 N.J.L. 162 |
| Parties | STATE (TOWN OF WEST HOBOKEN et al. Prosecutors) v. BOARD OF COM'RS OF HUDSON COUNTY et al. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Writs of certiorari by the town of West Hoboken, the town of West New York, the town of Union, the township of North Bergen, and the township of Weehawken against the county board of commissioners of appeal in cases of taxation in the county of Hudson and others to review the action of the county board of commissioners in taxation and assessment cases. Action of board affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Argued November term, 1900, before GARRISON and GARRETSON, JJ.
Augustus A. Rich for prosecutors town of West Hoboken and town of West New York. Horace L.
Allen, for prosecutor town of Union. Emil J. Walschied, for prosecutor North Bergen Tp.
Henry M. Nutzhorn, for prosecutor Weehawken Tp.
William D. Edwards, for defendants.
GARRETSON, J. Five writs of certiorari were allowed to remove the action of the county board of commissioners of appeal in cases of taxation and for equalizing assessments of taxes in the county of Hudson upon the several applications of the town of West Hoboken, town of West New York, town of Union, township of Weehawken, and township of North Bergen. The reasons filed were Identical in all the cases, save only that in the case of the township of North Bergen reasons additional were filed attacking the existence of the county board, and claiming that the act under which it was created was repealed by implication by the adoption in 1875 of that amendment to the constitution (article 4, § 7, par. 12), which provides that "property shall be assessed for taxes under general laws and by uniform rules according to its true value." The county board exists by virtue of an act of the legislature entitled "An act creating a county board of commissioners of appeal in cases of taxation and for equalizing assessments for taxes in the county of Hudson," approved April 4, 1873 (P. L. 1873, p. 794). This act substitutes the board thereby created for the board of assessors provided for in the general tax law, and imposed upon it substantially the same duties. The action of the county board which called forth the application for these writs was in adopting a resolution adding to the aggregate values returned by the several assessors of the prosecutors different percentages, thereby fixing and adjusting the proportion or quota of the assessment for each town and township. It is required of the board of assessors by the general tax law (Gen. St. p. 3309, § 140) that, if it shall appear to the assessors "from a careful, particular, and thorough comparison of the said respective duplicates, that the value of the property contained in any duplicate is relatively less than the value of other property in the county, they may for the purpose of fixing and adjusting the said proportion or quota, and for that purpose only, add thereto such percentage as shall appear to them just and proper and warranted by said comparison, but not otherwise." By the special act creating the board for Hudson county (P. L 1873, p. 794) the commissioners are to examine the assessors upon oath, and to examine witnesses as to the valuations for the purpose of equalizing the same between the several assessment diptricts, "and, if it shall appear to said commissioners that the value of the property contained in any duplicate is relatively less than the value of other property in the county, they may, for the purpose of fixing and adjusting the said proportion or quota, and for that purpose only, add thereto such percentage as shall appear to them just and proper, but not otherwise." In Rexroth v. Ames, 55 N. J. Law, 509, 26 Atl. 787, Justice Van Syckel says:. "The county board of assessors meet only for the purpose of determining how much each township and borough shall contribute to the state and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
New Deemer Mfg. Co. v. Alexander
... ... 599, 86 N.W. 182; The ... Islands (1886), 28 F. 478; Hudson v ... Ocean S. S. Co. (1888) 110 N.Y. 625, 17 N.E. 342; ... this state, lays down the rule plainly that recovery can be ... had for the present ... ...
-
City of Passaic v. Passaic County Bd. of Taxation
...taxation created by the legislature to secure an equal and fair distribution of the burden of taxation, Town of West Hoboken v. Board of Commissioners of Appeal, 66 N.J.L. 162, 49 A. 9. Consequently, the Division of Tax Appeals has the jurisdiction and the duty to review the county equaliza......
-
City Of New Brunswick v. Middlesex County Equalization Table.
...taxation created by the legislature to secure an equal and fair distribution of the burden of taxation. Town of West Hoboken v. Board of Com'rs of Hudson County, 66 N.J.L. 162, 49 A. 9. Consequently, the Division of Tax Appeals has the jurisdiction and the duty to review the county equaliza......
-
Johnson v. Hahne
...the old windows. The whole case before me, therefore, depending on the complainant's right to light and air for the new windows, as resting 49 A. 9 on the circumstances of the original structures and the subsequent conveyances and on the uses of these windows, I reach the conclusion that th......