State v. Mission Free School

• Decision Date: 07 May 1901
• Citation: 62 S.W. 998,162 Mo. 332
• Parties: STATE ex rel. ZIEGENHEIN, Collector, v. MISSION FREE SCHOOL et al.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

62 S.W. 998

162 Mo. 332

STATE ex rel. ZIEGENHEIN, Collector, v. MISSION FREE SCHOOL et al.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

May 7, 1901.

TAXATION—EXEMPTIONS—LEASEHOLD ESTATE—BUILDINGS OF LESSEE—FAILURE TO ASSESS — TAXABLE PROPERTY — ST. LOUIS MISSION SCHOOL—DOUBLE EXEMPTION.

1. Where defendant was tenant of land under a lease providing that buildings which he might erect thereon should not become part of the realty, but remain personal property of the lessee, he is not liable for taxes thereon under an assessment of the entire property to the lessor.

2. Where defendant was the owner of buildings situated on leased land, which was exempt from taxation, such buildings were taxable, notwithstanding that there was no statute authorizing the taxation of such an interest, since all property is taxable, except such as is specifically exempted by the constitution.

3. Where a lease provided that buildings which the lessee might erect on the premises should not become part of the realty, but remain the property of the lessee, an assessment of all the property to the lessor is illegal and void.

4. Under Act Jan. 30, 1863, incorporating a mission free school of St. Louis, and exempting its property from taxation to the extent of $50,000, and Const. art. 10, § 6, exempting lots of one acre and the buildings thereon, when used for charitable purposes, such mission free school is not entitled to add the exemption of the constitution to that of the statute, but is liable for taxes on all the excess of its property over $50,000.

Appeal from St. Louis circuit court; John A. Talty, Judge.

Action by the state, on relation of Henry Ziegenhein, as collector of the revenue of the city of St. Louis, against the Mission Free School, of St. Louis, and another. From a judgment in favor of relator, defendants appeal. Reversed.

Given Campbell and Chas. L. Moss, for appellants. E. C. Slevin, for respondent.

GANTT, J.

This is an action by the collector of the revenue of the city of St. Louis against the Mission Free School, a charitable corporation, and Judson M. Thompson, to enforce a lien for certain state, city, school, and other back taxes for the years 1893 and 1894, on a certain lot of ground in block 194 of the city of St. Louis, having a front of 59 feet on Eighth street, by a depth of 127 feet, and bounded north by the property of Yore, east by Eighth street, south by the property of Ames et al., and west by an alley. The petition alleges the delinquency of the taxes, and the regular steps taken to enforce the same. The prayer for judgment asks that the collector may have judgment for the amount of the said taxes, interest, costs, etc., and that the same be adjudged a lien on said lot, and that said lot and Thompson's leasehold may be sold under a special fieri facias. There are no allegations in the petition having any bearing whatsoever upon the leasehold interest in said property of Judson M. Thompson. Neither the leasehold interest or building of J. M. Thompson was ever assessed, no tax bills were ever made out against this leasehold interest and the building erected thereon by him, and no cause of action is stated in the petition against said leasehold interest and house of Judson M. Thompson. The tax bills were issued and made out against the real estate belonging to the Mission Free School, and in the name of the Mission Free School as sole owner. The Mission Free School filed an answer setting up an act January 30, 1863, being "An act to incorporate a mission free school of St. Louis," and alleged that it was organized under that law, and that it has ever since actively maintained a charity school under the provisions of said enactment, and that the land mentioned in the tax bill is exempt from taxes; that the improvements belonged to Judson M. Thompson, and that the Mission Free School is not liable for taxes on the improvements; that the land in question is a portion of the endowment of the Mission Free School; and that the income of said property is used solely for charitable purposes. The answer of Judson M. Thompson set up the act of January 30, 1863, and alleges that the defendant the Mission Free School was exempt from taxation upon said property. The act of 1863 provides "that all of said property, not exceeding fifty thousand ($50,000) dollars value, shall be exempt from taxation." Section 3 of the act declares that the said Mission Free School shall receive, provide for, and educate orphan children, etc. The by-laws provide for the...