101 Tenn. 146 | Tenn. | 1898
This is a suit to recover taxes paid for State, county, and municipal purposes. It is in
It appears that the tax complained of was assessed by the County Assessor upon -the steamer General Pierson. It is agreed that this steamer is used exclusively in transferring freight and passengers across the Mississippi River, at Memphis, from the tracks of the Little Rock & Memphis Railroad, in Arkansas, to its terminal tracks in Memphis, and is the property of the railroad company. It is insisted that, being railroad property, it is not subject to assessment by the County Assessor, but only by the State Railroad Assessors. It appears that it was not assessed by Railroad Assessors as c ‘ distributable property ’ ’ of the railroad company. It does not appear whether it was by them assessed as 1 c localized property ’ ’ or not, and this is immaterial.
The trial Judge was of opinion that the tax was assessed by the county Assessor without any authority of law, and gave judgment that the- plaintiff recover, the portion paid to the State,' inasmuch as it had
It has been held that the Act prescribing that taxes due the State must be paid, and suit brought within thirty days if deemed illegal and unjust, has no application to county and city taxes. Saunders v. Russell, 10 Lea, 299; City of Nashville v. Smith, 2 Pick., 213.
The effect of this is to leave the common law remedies in force in such cases, and the county and city, if the tax was illegal in the sense of being-unauthorized by any law, could sue to recover it back, if exacted and paid under protest and to save seizure of property, and the thirty days’ limit would not apply in such case.
We are of opinion there was no authority for such assessment by the county Assessor. In the entire absence of authority to assess the tax, it could be recovered back if the plaintiff was compelled to pay it to save his property from seizure and sale.
The question of á tax unequally laid, where the County Assessor had authority to make an assessment, and the proper remedy in such .cases, does not arise under the facts in this case, and is not considered.
The judgment of the Court below is reversed, and proper judgment will be rendered here for the amount of taxes improperly' collected from the plaintiff by the county and city, respectively, and the costs of the cause will be paid equally by the county and city.