State v. Board of Equalization

• Decision Date: 09 November 1891
• Parties: STATE ex rel. LEMON et al. v. BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF BUCHANAN COUNTY et al.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

18 S.W. 782

108 Mo. 235

STATE ex rel. LEMON et al. v. BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF BUCHANAN COUNTY et al.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 1.

November 9, 1891.

TAXATION — ASSESSMENT — BOARD OF EQUALIZATION.

1. The fact that the records of a county board of equalization fail to show that the members took the oath of office required by Rev. St. 1879, § 6672, does not invalidate an equalization made by them.

2. The fact that Rev. St. 1879, § 6673, which authorizes county boards of equalization to raise the assessed valuation of real and personal property, does not provide for notice to those whose personal property is to be affected, does not invalidate the action of the board as to such property where the same notice was in fact given as is prescribed therein for real property, and the parties affected appeared before the board at the appointed time.

Appeal from circuit court, Buchanan county; JOSEPH P. GRUBB, Special Judge.

Certiorari by the state of Missouri on the relation and to the use of John S. Lemon, Isaac T. Hosea, and John S. Logan, administrators of the estate of Milton Tootle, deceased, against the board of equalization of Buchanan county, Mo., A. M. Dougherty, John Kelly, James Terrell, Theodore Steinacker, and Philip Rogers, to annul an increase by said board of the personal assessment of Milton Tootle, deceased, for state and county taxes for the year 1887. Plaintiff obtained judgment, and defendants appeal. Reversed.

The other facts fully appear in the following statement by SHERWOOD, C. J.:

The administrators of the estate of Milton Tootle procured the issuance of a writ of certiorari against the board of equalization of Buchanan county for the purpose of vacating and annulling the action of the members of that board, for that they, as is alleged, without any complaint made or appeal taken or notice to relators, had changed or raised the valuation or assessment of said Tootle's personal property as returned by him in his life-time from $104,250 to $980,000. The board of equalization at their meeting on the 25th day of April, 1887, and on the appearance of counsel on behalf of said administrators, reduced said last-mentioned sum to $710,000. The return of the respondents shows that they heard evidence on the date last mentioned as to the value of the property in question, but did not preserve the same, nor was such preservation asked by relator's counsel, who fully argued the cause, and after that the change in the valuation of the property was made. And the transcript which accompanies the return of the respondents shows also that, before making the change in valuation last aforesaid, evidence was heard on the part of relators against the increase of the valuation of Tootle's personal property, as raised by the board of equalization, and, after taking the matter under advisement, made the change last aforesaid. The result of the hearing in the circuit court was that, on motion of relators, the change made in the valuation of the personal property of Tootle's estate was, by the judgment of that court, vacated and annulled; hence this appeal.

The statutory provisions relative to the subject of this litigation are these: "Sec. 6671. There shall be in each county in this state, except the city of St. Louis, a county board of equalization, which board shall consist of the county clerk, who shall be secretary of the same, but have no vote, the county surveyor, the judges of the county court, and the county assessor, which board shall meet at the office of the county clerk on the first Monday in April of each year. Sec. 6672. Said board shall have power to hear complaints, and to equalize the valuation and assessments upon all real and personal property within the county which is made taxable by law, and, having each taken an oath, to be administered by the clerk, fairly and impartially to equalize the valuation of all the taxable property in such county, shall immediately proceed to equalize the valuation and assessment of all such property, both real and personal, within their counties, respectively, so that each tract of land shall be entered on the tax-book at its true value: provided, that said board shall not reduce the valuation of the real or personal property of the county below the value thereof, as fixed by said state board of equalization. Sec. 6673. The following rules shall be observed by county boards of equalization: First, they shall raise the valuation of all such tracts or parcels of land, and any personal property, as, in their opinion, have been returned below their real value, according to the rule prescribed by this act for such valuation; but, after the board shall have raised the valuation of such real estate, it shall give public notice of the fact, specifying the property and the amount raised, either by advertisement in a newspaper published in the county, or, if there be none, then by posters, one to be put up in each township, and that said board...