State v. Schramm

• Decision Date: 01 June 1917
• Docket Number: No. 20022.,20022.
• Parties: STATE ex rel. AMERICAN AUTOMOBILE INS. CO. v. SCHRAMM et al.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

196 S.W. 21

271 Mo. 223

STATE ex rel. AMERICAN AUTOMOBILE INS. CO. v. SCHRAMM et al.

No. 20022.

Supreme Court of Missouri. In Banc.

June 1, 1917.

Certiorari by the State of Missouri, on the relation of the American Automobile Insurance Company, a corporation, against Frank W. Schramm, as president of the Board of Assessors of the City of St. Louis, and Edmond Koeln, as Collector of the City of St. Louis, to quash the record of assessment of relator's property by the board of equalization of the city of St. Louis. Record quashed.

Bryan & Williams and Alroy S. Phillips, all of St. Louis, for relator. Charles H. Daues and Truman P. Young, both of St. Louis, for respondents.

BLAIR, J.

Relator is a corporation, organized under the insurance laws of this state and engaged in writing insurance on automobiles. This is a proceeding by writ of certiorari to quash the record of the assessment of certain of relator's property by the board of equalization of the city of St. Louis. In making its return to the assessor, relator listed securities aggregating $376,085.87. It reported its reinsurance reserve as $337,773.38 and unpaid losses aggregating $70,000. The total of the reserve and unpaid losses therefore exceeded the assets listed in the sum of $31,687.21. The board of equalization, after notice, added $200,000 in United States bonds and $18,000 in stock of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company to the gross assets, deducted from this total the reserve and losses mentioned, and assessed relator with the difference, $186,311.69.

Relator contends the effect of this is to tax the United States bonds and the railroad stock, and that this is unlawful. Respondents concede the bonds cannot be taxed, but insist they are not subjected to taxation by the assessment made, and that there is no legal obstacle in the way of taxing the stock.

Section 11357, R. S. 1909, has been amended (Laws 1911, p. 417), and insurance companies organized under the laws of this state are now assessable and taxable as such companies in their corporate names. Under section 7098, R. S. 1909:

"Every such company * * * shall make returns, * * * first, of all the real estate held or controlled by it; second, of the net value of all its other assets or values in excess of the legally required reserve necessary to reinsure its outstanding risks and of any unpaid policy claims, which net values shall be assessed and taxed as the property of individuals. * * *"

By section 7013, R. S. 1909, such companies must report to the superintendent of insurance, among other things:

"The liabilities of the company, as follows: First, the amount due or to become due to banks or other creditors; second, losses" of all kinds; and, "fifth, premium reserved or amount required to safely reinsure all outstanding risks."

The section then prescribes the method of estimating such reserve in certain cases.

I. The contention that relator was not required to maintain a reserve is not tenable. Its organization under section 6995 to write "all kinds of insurance on automobiles" is the only description of its powers with which we are provided. If, as suggested, the only reserves required are those mentioned in section 7013, R. S. 1909, yet these include fire policies, and relator was authorized to write such insurance on automobiles. The board of equalization had the facts before it and found the amount of the reserve to be the sum deducted by relator as such. The record does not warrant us in questioning that conclusion of the board.

II....