People v. Hastings

California Supreme Court Jul 1, 1866Published

Before: Rhodes

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. A tax is invalid if it is not based on an assessment made by an assessor elected by the qualified electors of the district where the property is situated, as required by the state Constitution. The legislature cannot perform the executive function of assessing property, nor can it validate a tax based on a prior year's assessment roll from a different district.

Issues

Whether a tax levied based on a prior year's assessment roll from a different district satisfies constitutional requirements.
Whether the legislature has the authority to perform the assessment of property for taxation purposes.
Whether a tax is valid if the assessment was not made by an assessor elected by the qualified electors of the district where the property is situated.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“An assessment, made as directed by law, is an indispensable basis for the support of the tax that may be levied upon it.”

“A tax, in order to be valid, must rest upon an assessment made in the mode prescribed by law and by an Assessor elected as provided for by the Constitution.”

“The copying by one officer of the valuation made by another officer is not a valuation made by the first officer.”

Synopsis

An Assessment necessary to the Validity of a Tax.—A tax, in order to be valid, must rest upon an assessment made in the mode prescribed by law, by an Assessor elected by the qualified electors of the district, county, or town in which the property is taxed for State, county, or town purposes.

Without an Assessment a Tax Deed void.—-If the property is not listed and assessed for the purpose of taxation, the tax deed conveys no title.

Assessor to be Elected by the District where the Tax is levied.—An assessment made by an Assessor elected by the qualified electors of the City and County of Sacramento, is not a sufficient basis for the levy of a tax in the City of Sacramento for city purposes.

Copying a former Assessment Roll not an Assessment. — The making of a certified copy by an Assessor of an assessment roll made by another Assessor a previous year, is not an assessment of property.

Law fixing the Assessed Value of Property.—The Legislature cannot, by law, fix the assessed value of property.

An Answer need not Deny an Averment of Law.—Proceedings which are void by reason of the infirmity of the statute under which they are had, are not cured by an averment in a complaint that they were duly and legally had, and a failure to deny the averment in the answer is not an admission that the proceedings were valid or legal.

By the Court, Rhodes, J. Suit was brought for the recovery of delinquent taxes levied for the year 1863. The defendant had judgment and the plaintiffs appeal from the judgment and the order refusing a new trial. It appears from the pleadings that the taxes sued for were levied under the Act to incorporate the City of Sacramento, approved April 25th, 1863. (Stats. 1863, p. 415.) The assessment was made under the provisions of the following sections of that Act:

“ Section 63. For the purpose of enabling the city authorities to levy and collect the annual and special taxes for the fiscal year commencing on the first Monday in April, A. D. 1863, in the months of April and May of said year, the Board of Trustees are hereby authorized and empowered to levy the annual and special taxes provided in this Act within three days after the first meeting in 1863, upon all the taxable property within the limits of the City of Sacramento as assessed in the equalized assessment roll of the City and County of Sacramento for the year 1862. And said taxes when so levied shall be a lien upon all property in said assessment roll for said fiscal year.

“ Sec. 64. It is hereby made the duty of the Assessor to make a certified copy of the assessment roll for said year 1862, so far as to include the property of the city, which assessment is hereby adopted, and the value of the property in the same is made the basis for said taxes, and deliver the same to the Auditor.”

The property assessed was personal property, and its value stated at forty-five thousand dollars.

[451]It will be unnecessary to examine the errors assigned by the appellant, for one ground of objection taken by the respondent is fatal to the action, and that is, that there was no assessment of property in the City of Sacramento for the purposes of taxation for the year 1863. It is alleged in the complaint that the Board of Trustees did levy the taxes in 1863 upon “ all the taxable property within the limits of said city, as assessed in the equalized assessment roll of the City and County of Sacramento for the year 1862 and section sixty-three, already cited, was the only provision of the Act authorizing the levy to be made for the year 1863. It is further alleged in the complaint that the City Assessor made a certified copy of the assessment roll for the year 1862, which served as the assessment list for 1863. It thus appears that no assessment was made for the year 1863, unless the copy just mentioned constituted an assessment.

People v. Hastings

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief