State v. Pulliam
| Decision Date | 07 March 1911 |
| Citation | 135 S.W. 443,233 Mo. 229 |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. WESTERN TIE & TIMBER CO. v. PULLIAM et al. |
Rev. St. 1899, § 8546, provided that at the meeting in September the board of equalization "shall have the same powers and shall proceed in the same manner as provided in article 1 of chapter 149, Rev. St. 1899," which gave the board no power to add omitted property. Acts 1903, p. 253, was in effect an amendment to Rev. St. 1899, §§ 9118-9136, and authorized the board at its September session to assess and equalize the value of any property that may have been omitted from the assessor's books "then under examination by said board" and to add the omitted property for 1905. Rev. St. 1899, § 8486, provides that manufacturers shall be licensed and taxed on tools, machinery, and appliances in the same manner as is provided for licensing and taxing of merchandise. Held, that section 8486 applies to manufacturers, and that a county board of equalization had power at its meeting in September, 1905, to add property omitted from the assessment for that year, but was not authorized to correct the assessment for 1904 at such meeting.
2. TAXATION (§ 467)—CORRECTION OF ASSESSMENT—ADDITION OF PROPERTY—TRAM RAILROAD—"TOOL"—"MACHINE"—"APPLIANCE OF A MANUFACTURING BUSINESS."
A return by a county board of equalization designating property added as a "tram railroad" without any statement as to its character, location, construction, or use, except that it is operated in the business of manufacturing timber, is insufficient to offer a proper basis for assessment, and it does not constitute either a "tool" or a "machine" or "appliance of a manufacturing business," within Rev. St. 1899, § 8486.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Ripley County; J. C. Sheppard, Judge.
The Western Tie & Timber Company sued out a writ of certiorari to John A. Pulliam and others, composing the County Board of Equalization, and appeals from an order quashing the writ. Reversed and remanded, with directions to quash the return to the writ.
Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court of Ripley county, quashing a writ of certiorari theretofore issued by that court and directed to respondents, composing the county board of equalization of said county. The case arises upon the following facts: Respondents, composing said board of equalization, met at the office of the county clerk of said county on the first Monday in September, 1905, and took an oath that they would "fairly and impartially adjust the merchants' and manufacturers' statement book of all the merchants and manufacturers within Ripley county, Missouri, as assessed by the county assessor June 1, 1905." Among other proceedings was the following: Thereafter, on the fourth Monday in September, 1905, the board met and reduced the said assessment on said tram railroad, for the year 1904, from $12,000 to $8,000, and for the year 1905, from $25,000 to $12,000.
John M. Atkinson and Block & Sullivan, for appellant. Thos. F. Lane, for respondents.
FERRISS, J. (after stating the facts as above).
1. We are of the opinion that the board of equalization had power at the September session to correct the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- State v. Wood
- State v. Wood
-
Bradley v. Degnon Contracting Co.
...term ‘tramway’ has not a fixed and strict meaning. Woodward Iron Co. v. Lewis, 171 Ala. 233,54 South. 566;State ex rel. Western Tie & Timber Co. v. Pulliam, 233 Mo. 229, 135 S. W. 443. The structure was, under the findings and within the intendment of the statute, a tramway. South Knoxville......
-
Idalia Realty & D. Co. v. Norman's Southeastern Ry. Co
...the more vital questions in controversy, to state our own impression with respect to the word "tram." In State ex rel. Western Tile & Timber Co. v. Pulliam, 233 Mo. 229, 135 S. W. 443, the question before the court was the validity of the action of the board of equalization of Ripley county......