No. 15,645 | Ind. | May 1, 1891
The appellant brought this suit against the appellees to enjoin the collection of certain taxes. The court sustained the separate demurrers of the appellees to the complaint, to which rulings the appellant excepted, and refused to plead further, and the court rendered judgment, on demurrer, for the appellees. The rulings, in sustaining the separate demurrers of the appellees to the complaint, are assigned as error. It isv shown by the averments in the complaint that on and prior to April 1, 1883, there existed in the city of Lawrenceburgh a national bank, known and designated as the City National Bank of Lawrenceburgh, Indiana, said bank having been regularly organized, and was being operated under the laws of the United States. The capital stock of the bank was one hundred thousand dollars, divided into 1,000 shares of $100 each. On April 1st, 188Í, Dewitt C. Fitch owned 787 shares of the capital stock of said bank, and Henry C. Fitch owned 60 shares of said capital stock; that on said date said bank was largely indebted, and the capital stock was, in fact, of no value ; that between the 1st day of April and the 1st day of June, 1883, the assessor for the city of Lawrenceburgh assessed to and against the said bank the entire amount of said capital stock at its full face value, without designating any portion of the same as being owned by any particular owner, and the same was placed on the city tax duplicate for said year as an assessment against said bank, the tax assessed upon the same against the bank being $1>143.45, which so remained upon.
The property, the bank stock, owned by Fitch and Fitch, was assessed by the proper officer, and the value, being the par value, was fixed by the officer, but it was erroneously entered upon the books in the wrong name, being assessed to the jaank instead of the owners of the stock; afterwards the amount was separated, and the proper amount owned by each stockholder charged to each of them respectively. The property was owned by the parties, Fitch and Fitch, on the first day of April, 1883, and was subject to taxation, .and being assessed by the proper officer, the lien for taxes attached. Evansville, etc., R. R. Co. v. Hays, 318 Ind. 214.
The averments that the property was of no value, and that the owners were entitled to deductions on account of indebtedness, are of no avail in this proceeding. The assessor was charged with the duty of fixing the value on the property. Sections 3071 and 3072, B. S. 1881. And if the parties were aggrieved on account of being assessed with a greater amount than should, have been charged against them, they had a remedy by appearing before the city board of equalization. Section 3157, R. S. 1881; Board, etc., v. Senn, 117 Ind. 410" court="Ind." date_filed="1889-02-20" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/board-of-commissioners-v-senn-7049639?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="7049639">117 Ind. 410; Wattles v. City, etc., 40 Mich. 624" court="Mich." date_filed="1879-04-22" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/wattles-v-city-of-lapeer-7929350?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="7929350">40 Mich. 624; People, ex rel., v. McCarthy, 102 N.Y. 630" court="NY" date_filed="1886-07-27" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/people-ex-rel-mayor-etc-v--mccarthy-3626311?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="3626311">102 N. Y. 630; Illinois, etc., Coal Co. v. Stookey, 122 Ill. 358" court="Ill." date_filed="1887-09-28" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/illinois--st-louis-railroad--coal-co-v-stookey-6963501?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="6963501">122 Ill. 358; Camp v. Simpson, 118 Ill. 224" court="Ill." date_filed="1886-10-06" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/camp-v-simpson-6963168?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="6963168">118 Ill. 224.
The property having been owned by Fitch and Fitch on the 1st day of April, 1883, and being assessed by the assessor, they became liable for the taxes chargeable against the stock the same as any other property owned by them, and they can not enjoin its collection on account of the entry being made upon the books against the bank instead of
There was no error in sustaining the demurrer to the complaint.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.
Millek, J., took no part in the decision of this case.