Sussex County v. Jarratt

• Decision Date: 17 March 1921
• Citation: 106 S.E. 384
• Parties: SUSSEX COUNTY. v. JARRATT et al.
• Court: Virginia Supreme Court

106 S.E. 384

SUSSEX COUNTY.

v.JARRATT et al.

Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia.

March 17, 1921.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Sussex County.

Consolidated suits by B. F. Jarratt and by S. B. Grant against the County of Sussex. Decree for complainants, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Thos. H. Howerton, of Waverly, and Buford & Peterson, of Lawrenceville, for appellant.

Geo. Bryan, of Richmond, and Wm. B. Cocke, of Stony Creek, for appellees.

SAUNDERS, J. These are two suits in equity, brought, respectively, by S. B. Grant, for himself and other stockholders similarly situated, and B. F. Jarratt, suing in like fashion, against the county of Sussex. The complainant Grant is the owner of one share of the capital stock of the Bank of Waverly, and the complainant Jarratt, of 33 shares of the capital stock of the Bank of Stony Creek, both banks situate in the county of Sussex. The object of these suits was to enjoin the treasurer of said county from levying certain taxes alleged to be due by the said complainants to the said county for the years 1912, 1913, and 1914. This alleged claim of the county arose in the following fashion: The board of supervisors of the county of Sussex did not make a levy for the years

1912, 1913, and 1914 on the shares of the stock of banks in that county. Some years later the board essayed to collect these taxes. Its first order to this end was made on December 20, 1917, and is as follows:

"Walter Harrison, commissioner of revenue for district No. 1, is directed to assess back taxes on bank stock in district No. 1 for the years 1912, 1913 and 1914, and report at next meeting of this board."

The second order was made at a meeting of the board on January 7, 1918:

"Ordered that G. O. Wrenn, commissioner of the revenue for district No. 2, be and he is hereby instructed to make a levy, assessing the banks in district No. 2 with levy for the county and district purposes for the years 1912,

1913, and 1914, in accordance with an order heretofore entered in this matter, and the clerk is instructed hereby to certify a copy of same to said G. O. Wrenn, commissioner of the revenue."

This order is not very clear, inasmuch as it directs the commissioner in district No. 2 to "make a levy assessing the banks in his district with the levy for the county and district purposes, for the years 1912, 1913, and 1914 in accordance with an order heretofore entered in this matter." The order theretofore entered was an order directing Walter Harrison to assess back taxes on bank stock in his district (No. 1). Of course, strictly speaking, the board could not direct a commissioner to make a levy, nor could the commissioner in district No. 2 make a levy assessing the banks in his district in accordance with an order directing the commissioner in another district to assess back taxes on bank stock in that district. However, petitioner in error construes the second order to constitute a direction to the commissioner in the second district to assess the "bank stock" in his district for the years 1912, 1913, and 1914, and this construction will be adopted for the purposes of a decision of this controversy.

In January, 1918, the commissioner of the revenue for district No. 1 made an assessment for the years referred to in the order of December 20, 1917. This assessment, as will he noted from a copy of the same, was upon the banks in the commissioner's district, and on the aggregate amount of their capital. It contained neither the names of the stockholders of the banks, nor the number of shares held by them respectively. This assessment is as follows:

Bank Stock of the Banks of Stony Creek and Jarratt.

                -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                |                  |              |Aggregate|          |                      |
                |Name of Person    |Residence     |         |Total     |Total Levy for Country|
                |Bank of Stony     |Stony Creek   |Amt      |          |and District          |
                |                  |              |         |Amt.Levied|                      |
                |                  |              |Assessed |          |                      |
                |------------------|--------------|---------|----------|----------------------|
                |Creek             |Va.           |         |          |                      |
                |------------------|--------------|---------|----------|----------------------|
                |1912              |"             |18,      |1.20      |216.24                |
                |                  |              |020.00   |          |                      |
                |------------------|--------------|---------|----------|----------------------|
                |1913              |"             |18.300.00|1.15      |210.45                |
                |------------------|--------------|---------|----------|----------------------|
                |1914              |"             |20,      |1.30      |271.90                |
                |                  |              |000.00   |          |                      |
                -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                

The assessment of the Bank of Jarratt is to the like effect as the above, and need not be given.

About this same time the commissioner of the revenue for district No. 2 reported under the order of January 17, 1918. He testifies that he was instructed by the board to assess the bank stocks in his district for county and district purposes for the years 1912, 1913, and 1914. He filed his record book showing his official action under this instruction. All the banks in his district were assessed in the same fashion, so that an extract as to one bank only will be sufficient in this connection.

                -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                |                    |Ag.       |Gen. Co.|Co. Sen.|Dist.   |Dist.    |Total.  |
                |                    |Capital   |        |        |Rd.     |Sen.     |        |
                |--------------------|----------|--------|--------|--------|---------|--------|
                |Bank of Waverly.    |          |40      |20      |25      |20       |1.05    |
                |1912.               |          |        |        |        |         |        |
                |--------------------|----------|--------|--------|--------|---------|--------|
                |Waverly Va.         |95272.79  |381.49  |190.74  |238.43  |190.75   |1,      |
                |                    |          |        |        |        |         |001.41  |
                |--------------------|----------|--------|--------|--------|---------|--------|
                |                    |          |40      |20      |20      |20       |1.00    |
                |--------------------|----------|--------|--------|--------|---------|--------|
                |" " " 1913.         |103500.   |414.00  |207.00  |207.00  |207.00   |1,      |
                |                    |          |        |        |        |         |035.00  |
                |--------------------|----------|--------|--------|--------|---------|--------|
                |                    |          |40      |20      |20      |20       |1.00    |
                |--------------------|----------|--------|--------|--------|---------|--------|
                |" " " 1914          |112000.   |450.32  |225.16  |225.16  |225.16   |1,      |
                |                    |          |        |        |        |         |126.80  |
                |--------------------|----------|--------|--------|--------|---------|--------|
                |                    |          |1,      |622.90  |670.59  |622.91   |3,      |
                |                    |          |245.81  |        |        |         |162.21  |
                -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                

Commissioner Wrenn testifies that his record is entitled, "Assessment of Bank Stocks for County, District and Road Levies, for the Year 1917, " and under the title, "Name of Person, " are listed for the years 1912, 1913, and 1914 the Bank of Waverly, Waverly, Va., the Bank of Sussex and Surry, Wakefield, Va., and the Farmers' Bank of Wakefield, Wakefield, Va. Further that this was the only assessment made for the years 1912, 1913, and 1914 for county and district purposes. The assessments as made supra for the years 1912, 1913, and 1914 were furnished to the treasurer of Sussex in December, 1917, and January, 1918. No other assessments for these years were furnished him until some time in December, 1918, when Commissioner Wrenn furnished him with an itemized list of the stockholders of the banks in his district.

Upon receipt of these alleged assessments, the treasurer applied to the banks for pay-ment of the taxes, and posted one notice. The hanks asked for a little time for consideration. This was given. At its expiration, on advice of counsel, they refused to pay said taxes. The treasurer prepared to collect said taxes. Thereupon, in September, 1918, B. F. Jarratt, for himself and other stockholders of the Bank of Stony Creek, and S. B. Grant, for himself and other stockholders of the Bank of Waverly, filed their respective bills in equity against the county of Sussex for the purposes stated, supra.

These causes, by consent of counsel, were consolidated. Demurrers and answers were respectively filed, and depositions taken.

On the hearing, the court overruled the demurrers, entertained the bills, and enjoined the treasurer of Sussex county from taking any steps to collect the taxes alleged to be due to Sussex county upon complainants' shares of stock in their respective banks, for the years 1912, 1913, and 1914. An appeal from this decree was allowed by one of the judges of this court.

By a stipulation of counsel, it was agreed that the cases, supra, should be considered as test cases, in the matter of the several liabilities of the several banks of Sussex county and their respective stockholders, for county taxes alleged to be due to the county of Sussex for the years 1912, 1913, and 1914.

The same parties who are complainants above endeavored to secure, by motion, the same relief sought in their bills in equity. These motions were dismissed in the circuit court of Sussex county, and writs of error were secured to the rulings of the court by the county of Sussex.

The same stipulations were...