State v. Pownell

• Citation: State v. Pownell, 6 A. 441, 49 N.J.L. 169 (N.J. 1886)
• Decision Date: 15 November 1886
• Writing for the Court: PARKER, J.
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
• Parties: THE STATE, ADRIAN S. APPELGET, PROSECUTOR, v. FRANK H. POWNELL, COLLECTOR, &c

6 A. 441

49 N.J.L. 169

STATE (APPLEGET, Prosecutor)

v. POWNELL, Collector, etc.¹

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

November 10, 1886.

On certiorari. In matter of tax.

A. S. Appleget, pro se.

PARKER, J. This certiorari brings before the court the assessment of taxes for the year 1885 on property of Adrain S. Appleget, in the township of Monroe, in the county of Middlesex. The only reason for setting aside the assessment, urged by the prosecutor, is the alleged erroneous valuation by the assessor of his farm. It is said by prosecutor that his farm is rated higher than similar farm land, of equal or greater value, in the same township. An effort was made to prove this, but the evidence is not satisfactory. Even if the testimony proved that the farm was rated too high in comparison with other lands in the vicinity, it would not avail the prosecutor in this proceeding. He had legal notice of the tax levied, in time to apply to the commissioners of appeal. He did not apply to the commissioners for a reduction. He says he had applied for reduction before other boards of commissioners, in former years, and had been refused. This is not a good reason for not applying to the board of 1885.

The prosecutor has no legal right to have the court order a reduction of the tax, or to set aside the assessment. On a question of value, depending on evidence, the court will not, on certiorari, entertain it, except by way of appeal, after the commissioners have acted. State v. Parker, 34 N. J. Law, 49. Whether an assessment is excessive, is within the province of the commissioners of appeal to determine, and application should first be made to them. State v. Danser, 23 N. J. Law, 553; State v. Parker, 34...