TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Curtis v. Ward

Charles H. Curtis v. Demus D. Ward, Adm'r of John D. Meredith, dec'd

Curtis v. Ward, 58 Mo. 295 (1874)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Missouri · State Highest Courts
Decided
October 15, 1874
Judges
Other, Wagner
Citations
58 Mo. 295
Headnotes
1. Revenue — Stock in National Bank, liable to taxation. — Shares in National Banks are liable to assessment ¡md taxation in this State. (Lionberger vs. Eoivse, 43 Mo., 67: First Nat. Bunk vs. Meredith, 44 Mo., 600, affirmed.) 2. Revenue — Personal property of non-residents. — Personal property of nonresidents which is found within the local jurisdiction is taxable here, regardless of whose hands it happens to be in.
Summary
Appeal from Sixth District Court.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Wagner

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Wagner, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The plaintiff brought suit in the Hannibal Court of Common Pleas against Meredith, who was the collector of Marion County, to recover the amount of State and county taxes collected of him. The petition alleged that plaintiff was a resident of the State of Illinois, and that he was the owner of certain shares of the capital stock in the First National Bank of Hannibal, in this State, and that the same was assessed to him in Marion County ; that the assessment was made without authority of law, and was illegal; that the stock was exempt from taxation, but, notwithstanding, the defendant levied upon the same and was about to sell it, to satisfy the taxes, when plaintiff, to prevent a sale and have the stock released, caused the taxes to be paid under a written protest. Judgment was therefore demanded for the amount.

To this petition a demurrer was filed, which was by the court overruled, and the defendant refusing to answer, and electi?ig to stand on his demurrer, a judgment absolute was rendered for the plaintiff. The defendant then appealed to the late District Court, where the judgment of the Common Pleas was affirmed, and from that decision the cause was brought here.

Two questions have been presented to this court: First— whether shares of stock in National Banks are taxable under the laws of this State ? Secondly — whether the stock being per *296 sonal property could be taxed here, when the plaintiff was a resident of another State? Since this suit was instituted, both of these questions have been determined in the affirmative. That the shares in National Banks are liable to assessment and taxation in this State, has been repeatedly decided and is no longer an open question. (Lionberger vs. Rowse, 43 Mo., 67 ; First Nat. Bank vs. Meredith, 44 Mo., 500 .)

It is equally well established, that the personal property of a non-resident is taxable here if it be found situate within the local jurisdiction, regardless of whose hands it may happen to be in. (St. Louis vs. Wiggins Ferry Co., 40 Mo., 580 ; Taylor, Adm’r vs. St. Louis County Court, 47 Mo., 594 .)

In the recent case of Tappan vs. The Merchant’s Nat. Bank of Chicago, before the United States Supreme Court, (not yet reported) it was held that the State, within which a National Bank is situated, has jurisdiction for the purpose of taxation of all the shareholders of the bank, both resident and non-resident.

It follows therefore, that the court erred in overruling the demurrer and its judgment will be reversed;

the other judges concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1894: 11897: 11915: 118942026peak 1894 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Billinghurst v. Spink County58 N.W. 272 (S.D. 1894)
  2. State ex rel. Collector of Knox County v. Bunce173 S.W. 101 (Mo. Ct. App. 1915)
  3. Schmidt v. Failey37 L.R.A. 442 (Ind. 1897)

Most recent

  1. State ex rel. Collector of Knox County v. Bunce173 S.W. 101 (Mo. Ct. App. 1915)
  2. Schmidt v. Failey37 L.R.A. 442 (Ind. 1897)
  3. Billinghurst v. Spink County58 N.W. 272 (S.D. 1894)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
State ex rel. Taylor v. St. Louis Cnty. Court, 47 Mo. 594 (1871) 32
City of St. Louis v. Wiggins Ferry Co., 40 Mo. 580 (1867) 24
First Nat'l Bank v. Meredith, 44 Mo. 500 (1869) 16
Lionberger v. Rowse, 43 Mo. 67 (1868) 15

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list