State v. Inspiration Consol. Copper Co.

• Decision Date: 02 July 1919
• Docket Number: Civil 1668
• Citation: 181 P. 955,20 Ariz. 503
• Parties: THE STATE OF ARIZONA and THE COUNTY OF GILA, Appellants, v. INSPIRATION CONSOLIDATED COPPER COMPANY. a Corporation, Appellee
• Court: Arizona Supreme Court

181 P. 955

20 Ariz. 503

THE STATE OF ARIZONA and THE COUNTY OF GILA, Appellants, v. INSPIRATION CONSOLIDATED COPPER COMPANY. a Corporation, Appellee

Civil No. 1668

Supreme Court of Arizona

July 2, 1919

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the county of Gila. G. W. Shute, Judge. Reversed and dismissed.

Mr Wiley E. Jones, Attorney General, and Mr. L. B. Whitney, Mr Clyde M. Gandy, Mr. F. J. K. McBride, and Mr. Alexander B Baker, Assistant Attorneys General, for Appellants.

Mr Edward W. Rice, for Appellee.

OPINION

CUNNINGHAM, C. J.

The mines of the appellee were appraised and assessed for taxes by the state tax commission under authority of paragraph 4829, Revised Statutes of Arizona of 1913, subdivision 13, viz.:

"It shall be the duty of the said commission, and it shall have the power and authority: (1) To have and exercise general supervision over the administration of the assessment and tax laws of the state, over city, town, and county assessors, over county and city boards of equalization, boards of supervisors, and all local boards of levy and assessments, to the end that all assessments of property of every class, kind, and character, real, personal, and mixed, be made at its full cash value; and to require assessors and county boards of equalization to assess all property of every class, kind, and character at its full cash value. . . .

"(13) To make appraisement and assessment . . . of all patented and unpatented producing mines, within the state. And on or before the second Monday of July to transmit, as provided by law, to the several county boards of supervisors, the assessed valuation found by it . . . on all patented and unpatented producing mines to the several county boards of supervisors of the counties in which the mines are located. The several county boards of supervisors shall enter on the roll all assessments transmitted to them by the state tax commission. . . ."

The mines of the appellee in Gila county were assessed for taxes for the year 1917 by the county tax assessor. The valuation placed thereon did not meet with the approval of the state tax commission, and, as a consequence, the state tax commission duly considered the matter of valuation of said mines, and proceeded to assess the same on the valuation said commission placed on the mines, under authority of paragraph 4829, supra. The said state tax commission ordered the board of supervisors of Gila county "to strike the assessment made by the county assessor from the tax-roll, and to enter instead the assessment made by the state tax commission." The appellee paid the amount of taxes levied on the valuation placed on said mines by the state tax commission, under protest, and gave notice of appeal to the superior court, following the procedure set forth in paragraph 4887, Revised Statutes of Arizona of 1913.

The appellee's notice of appeal is to the effect that --

It "hereby appeals from the action of the state tax commission or county assessor, fixing the valuation of the producing mines" in Gila county, Arizona, for purposes of taxes for the current fiscal year.

"This appeal is based upon the written protest of this company, addressed to and filed with the county treasurer and county tax collector of Gila county, Arizona. Copies of said protest and of the receipt of the full amount of taxes due from this company are attached hereto.

"Dated at Globe, Arizona, this 15th day of September, 1917."

This notice was filed in the office of the clerk of the board of supervisors of Gila county, September 15, 1917, and with the state tax commission on September 18, 1917.

The protest is addressed to the county treasurer and ex-officio tax collector of the said county, and recites that the company owning the producing mines and other property in said county "pays you this day, under protest, the sum of $624,224.14, being the full amount of taxes levied and assessed upon said mines and other property by the state tax commission or the county assessor in accordance with the valuation for tax purposes as fixed by the state tax commission or the county assessor for the current fiscal year. This company protests against these taxes, and against this assessment and against the amount thereof upon the following grounds:

"(1) The assessment is erroneous for the reason that the same is based wholly upon the profits of this company from said mines for the years 1915 and 1916, capitalized at 15 per cent. whereas the assessment of other producing mines of the same class in this state is based wholly upon the average profits of such mines for the five years from 1912 to 1916, both inclusive, and therefore the taxes so levied and assessed upon the property of this company are not on an equal or uniform basis with the taxes levied and assessed on the same class of property in the state, and all taxes are not uniform on the same class of property within the state. The assessment is in violation of section 1 of article 9, Constitution of Arizona.

"(2) The assessment and the amount thereof is erroneous because it is unequal, inequitable, and discriminatory as between the company and owners of other properties of the same class according to the classification of the state tax commission, because said assessment is based wholly upon the profits of this company for the years 1915 and 1916, without taking into account the factors of the lower price of copper and the restricted production prevailing as to other properties in the same class during the years prior to 1916, which factors were taken into account in fixing the assessment of all properties of the same class, and resulted in the lowering, to a material extent, of the valuations of all other properties of the same class below the level of that fixed for the property of this company.

"(3) Said assessment is erroneous, and the amount thereof is excessive. It is in excess of the full cash value of the property.

"(4) . . . Because it is in excess of the speculative value of the property. . . .

"(5) . . . Because it is based on the profits and income and earnings therefrom.

"(6) Said assessment is illegal for the reasons stated in paragraphs numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of this protest, and violates section 1 of article 9 of the Constitution of Arizona. Said assessment is further illegal, in that it deprives this company of its property without due process of law, and violates section 4 of article 2 of the Constitution of Arizona, and section 1 of article 14 of the Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, and denies to this company the equal protection of the laws, and violates section 1 of article fourteen of the Amendments to the Constitution of the United States."

Dated and signed.

The receipt of the county treasurer appears in form required by the statute, and bears the same date with the notice of appeal.

The abstract of the record fails to disclose the date upon which the said documents were filed in the superior court. The state's defense was filed on the eighteenth day of February, 1918. The trial was had before the judge of the court without a jury, and on the twentieth day of February, 1918, the trial was concluded, and the judge rendered his verdict, to the effect "that the full cash value of the Inspiration Consolidated Copper Company be, and it is, hereby fixed in the sum of $61,456,104.43."

From the assessment made by the state tax commission, the full cash value of the productive mines, "patented and unpatented, and all claims in a group contiguous thereto, belonging to said owner, and situated in the county of Gila, state of Arizona, . . . $74,168,808.00," there follows a detailed description of the property.

The parties filed written stipulations for continuances of the hearing, the first of which stipulations was filed September 24, 1917. The final judgment was entered March 7, 1918, from which the state appealed to this court by filing a notice of appeal on the nineteenth day of April, 1918.

The appellee has moved a dismissal of this appeal upon the ground that the law provides no appeal from the order made in this proceeding to the supreme court, and relies upon the case of Mohave County v. Stephens, 17 Ariz. 165, 149 P. 670. The same question was presented in that case, and decided by this court in accordance with the principle now contended for by the appellee in the case at hand.

This court decided in that case that when the parties have invoked the procedure authorized in paragraph 4887, Revised Statutes of Arizona of 1913, and proceeded to a final judgment in the superior court, no further appeal is provided for in such statute from such order to this court. Also, that no appeal in such case is provided by the general statute of appeals. We point out subdivision 6 of paragraph 1227, Revised Statutes of Arizona of 1913, the general appeal statute, which provides appeals "from a final order affecting a substantial right made in special proceedings or upon a summary application in an action after judgment." We said that "the final orders mentioned in subdivision 6 . . . is the equivalent to final judgment; still that subdivision undoubtedly has application to a final order affecting a substantial right made in a special proceeding commenced in the superior court from or brought into a superior court from any other court." In fact, it would seem that all the orders, judgments and decrees mentioned in paragraph 1227 must be orders, judgments and decrees entered in the superior court in actions or proceedings commenced therein or brought to that court from some other court. These words of original jurisdiction pervade the whole of section 1227, and limit the appellate jurisdiction of this court to a review of orders and judgments...