TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Cox v. Truitt

HARRIS COX v. JOHN F. TRUITT, COLLECTOR

Cox v. Truitt, 31 A. 168 (N.J. 1895)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of New Jersey · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 15, 1895
Judges
Garrison
Citations
31 A. 16857 N.J.L. 63528 Vroom 6351895 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 108
Headnotes
The act of 1893 {Pamph. L., p. 280), which provides for the assessment of taxes on official mortgages to the person having the beneficial interest therein, is unconstitutional, because of its special character, in that it fails to extend its provisions to all mortgages of like nature made to officers of the several courts of this state.
Summary
On certiorari.

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

Opinion of the Court — Garrison

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

The opinion of the court was delivered by Garrison, J.

This writ brings up the assessment of a tax on the principal sum.of a mortgage given in partition proceedings under an order of the Court of Chancery. The prosecutor is the beneficiary for life of half of the income under the will of-his father. The assessment'of this tax to the prosecutor is resisted by him upon several grounds, of which one only need be noticed, viz., that the statute under which the assessment is made is special, and hence unconstitutional. The act in question is a supplement to the “Act concerning taxes.” Pamph. L. 1893, p. 280. The evident purpose of this enactment is to permit the collection of the *636 taxes imposed on these official mortgages from the beneficiaries thereof. Its fatal defect is that it proceeds upon an imperfect classification. An act of like import was before this court in the case of Shotwell v. Dalrymple, 20 Vroom 530 , and was held to be unconstitutional, in that it did not include in its operation all official mortgages having substantially like characteristics. The act now before us is open to the same criticism, in that it fails to extend its provisions to mortgages made under the order of the Prerogative Court. Rev., tit. “Partition,” § 10.

The assessment to the prosecutor is invalid, and must be set aside.

How later courts describe this case

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

1903: 119032026peak 1903 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Adams v. Kuykendall83 Miss. 571 (1903)

Most recent

  1. Adams v. Kuykendall83 Miss. 571 (1903)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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