Sylvester v. Assessors of Braintree

• Citation: 344 Mass. 263,182 N.E.2d 120
• Parties: Helen SYLVESTER et al. v. ASSESSORS OF BRAINTREE.
• Decision Date: 04 May 1962
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

Page 120

182 N.E.2d 120

344 Mass. 263

Helen SYLVESTER et al. v. ASSESSORS OF BRAINTREE.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

Argued Feb. 8, 1962.

Decided May 4, 1962.

George H. Mitchell, Boston, for taxpayers.

Richard A. Hunt, Town Counsel, for Assessors of Braintree.

Before WILKINS, C. J., and SPALDING, WHITTEMORE, CUTTER, and KIRK, JJ.

WILKINS, Chief Justice.

The taxpayers, three minors, appeal by their mother and next friend from a decision of the Appellate Tax Board upholding the denial by the appellee board of assessors of Braintree of their application for the further abatement of real estate taxes for 1959 and 1960. G.L. c. 58A, § 13, as amended.

The issue is whether under G.L. c. 59, § 5, Seventeenth (as amended through St.1954, c. 351), the exemption on real estate owned by the taxpayers as tenants in common and occupied by them as their joint domicil is limited to the value of $2,000 or whether each of the three minor cowners is entitled to an exemption in that amount, making a total exemption of $6,000. Clause Seventeenth provides for an exemption of 'real estate, to the value of two thousand dollars, of a widow, or of any minor whose father is deceased, occupied by such widow, or minor as her or his domicile * * * provided, that the whole estate, real and personal, of such widow * * * or minor does not exceed in value the sum of eight thousand dollars * * *.' The appellants fall within the factual requirements of the statute.

The mother of the appellants took title to the real estate on October 16, 1958. She was then a widow and entitled to an exemption under the same clause. In November 1958, the mother without consideration conveyed to her three children.

The Appellate Tax Board stated in its decision, 'It is our opinion that in a case where real estate is owned by more than one minor, each of whom meets the requirements for exemption of such real estate as set forth in said G.L. c. 59, § 5, Seventeenth, the Legislature, nevertheless intended that such real estate should have the benefit of only one exemption.'

The board noted that, when the Legislature intended to grant two exemptions with regard to the same real estate, it provided for the additional exemption in plain terms. Reference was made to § 5, Twenty-Second (as amended through St.1958, c. 282, § 1), which exempts in stated amounts the real estate of a soldier or sailor occupied as a domicil, and provides that, if the spouse of a soldier or sailor 'is also a soldier or sailor, each shall receive the amount of the exemption provided in this clause to the same extent as if unmarried * * *.' The board further noted that clause Seventeenth was amended by St.1935, c. 294, by striking out the words, 'whether such property be owned by such persons separately, or jointly, or as tenants in common.' The 1935 amendment also added...