Citizens National Bank v. Nease

35 Pa. D. & C. 563, 1939 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 132
CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Washington County
DecidedJune 24, 1939
Docketno. 57
StatusPublished

This text of 35 Pa. D. & C. 563 (Citizens National Bank v. Nease) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Washington County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Citizens National Bank v. Nease, 35 Pa. D. & C. 563, 1939 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 132 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1939).

Opinion

Gibson, J.,

Certain real estate of defendants having been sold by the sheriff for the total sum of $800, the sheriff filed his schedule of distribution, applying the proceeds of the sale to: (1) Sheriff’s costs; (2) city, county, and school tax liens; (3) on account of two liens filed by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania [564]*564at no. 146 and no. 147, February term, 1937, for unpaid liquid fuel taxes. The balances distributed on these liens were $36.21 and $73.22, respectively.

These two liens in favor of the Commonwealth were entered on December 1,1936. The lien at no. 146, February term, 1937, covered liquid fuel taxes for the months of July to November, inclusive, 1929, in the sum of $6,-872.66. This tax was settled or determined on October 25,1932. The tax for which the lien was entered in favor of the Commonwealth at no. 147, February term, 1937, covered liquid fuel taxes for quarterly payments due March 1, 1928, and quarterly thereafter until June 30, 1929, totaling $13,004.46, settlement having been made on October 25, 1932.

The tax lien entered at no. 146, February term, 1937, was assessed under the provisions of the Act of May 1, 1929, P. L. 1037, 72 PS §2564.

The taxes for which the lien was entered at no. 147, February term, 1937, were assessed under the Act of April 14, 1927, P. L. 287.

On January 12, 1933, the Citizens National Bank entered judgments against W. G. Nease and J. M. Deal in the sum of $70,000, and on the same day W. D. Gordon, Secretary of Banking, Receiver of First Bank & Trust Company, entered judgments against W. G. Nease in the sum of $22,375, and on the same day the Citizens National Bank entered judgments against Thomas J. Langfitt, William G. Langfitt, and W. G. Nease, in the sum of $500. Each of these judgments was revived within the five-year period and retained its lien at the time of the sale of the real estate mentioned.

Exceptions were filed to the sheriff’s schedule of distribution by Citizens National Bank of Washington, Pa., and R. W. Doty, Secretary of Banking of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Receiver of First Bank & Trust Company of Washington, as to that portion of the schedule applying to the payments to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on account of its liens at no. 146 and no. [565]*565147, February term, 1937, in the sums of $36.21 and $73.22, respectively, and in not awarding the total of the said two items, viz., $109.43, to the Citizens National Bank of Washington and the Secretary of Banking, receiver, proportionately, on the liens held by them which they claim took priority over the liens for unpaid liquid fuel tax filed on behalf of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The question arises regarding the right of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to priority in the distribution of the proceeds of the sale of real estate.

The State of Pennsylvania has a sovereign right of priority over all creditors: South Philadelphia State Bank’s Insolvency, 295 Pa. 433, 438; Commonwealth v. Lowe Coal Co., 296 Pa. 359, provided the .State indicates its desire to exercise its sovereign power. It is evident that it may waive that right or priority if its legislative body so provides.

This brings us to a construction of the legislation provided for the levying and collecting of liquid fuel taxes. As to the construction of that legislation, there are certain general principles which must be borne in mind: (1) All taxation is statutory, and while it is the duty of every citizen to bear his just proportion of the burden of supporting National, State, and local government, he cannot be compelled to do so except in the way provided by statute. Liability to pay taxes arises from no contractual relation between the taxable and the taxing powers, and cannot be enforced by common-law proceedings unless a statute so provides. They can be collected in no other way than that pointed out by the statute, and cannot be collected until they have first been assessed according to the statute. Taxation is purely for the legislature. The judiciary can enforce it only as the legislature directs it to be enforced: Schmuck v. Hartman, 222 Pa. 190. (2) It is well settled that tax laws are to be construed most strictly against government and most favorably to the taxpayer, and a citizen cannot be subjected to a special burden without clear warrant of law: Hus[566]*566band’s Estate, 316 Pa. 361; Arbuckle’s Estate, 324 Pa. 501.

We think exceptants should be treated in the same manner as a taxpayer, for the reason that if the State is to have priority in the distribution of the proceeds of a debtor’s real estate, the lien creditors, who in order of date precede the liens of the State, will be required to bear the burden of the tax, and to that extent the property of the lien creditors is being taken for the payment of that which it was the duty of the taxpayer to pay.

The Act of 1927, supra, under which the lien at no. 147, February term, 1937, was filed, imposed a tax on liquid fuels and provided for the collection of such tax and the creation of liens. Section 12 of the act provided that the taxes collected by the dealer for the Commonwealth “shall be considered a public account, after being settled in the manner herein prescribed, and, as such, shall be a lien upon the franchise or property, both real and personal, of any dealer or consumer, after the same has been entered and indexed of record by the prothonotary of the county where the dealer’s or consumer’s franchise or property is situate.”

The Act of 1929, supra, under the provisions of which the lien at no. 146 February term, 1937, was filed, imposes a tax on liquid fuels, and provides for the collection thereof and the creation of liens. Section 12 of that act provides:

“All taxes collected by a dealer or consumer for the Commonwealth shall be considered a public account after being determined in the manner herein prescribed, and, as such, shall be a lien upon the franchises or property, both real and personal, of any dealer or consumer, after the same has been entered and indexed of record by the prothonotary of the county where the dealer’s or consumer’s franchises or property are situated.”

Section 14 of the same act provides for the collection of the tax by a warrant of distraint and a levy on goods, [567]*567chattels and effects of the taxpayer, and the sale thereof, and provides:

“(c) Upon any sale under a distraint, as hereinabove provided, the amount of the public account herein provided for shall, after deducting the expenses of such sale and all prior liens upon the property, be first appropriated out of the proceeds thereof to the payment of the said public account”.

The Fiscal Code of April 9, 1929, P. L. 343, sec. 1207, provides that the Department of Revenue shall collect the liquid fuel tax “as provided in the act or acts imposing said tax, and the procedure for making such collections, as well as the lien of said tax, shall be as provided in said act or acts.”

Section 1401 of The Fiscal Code, supra, is a general provision for the collection of all State taxes imposed under the authority of any law of this Commonwealth now or hereafter enacted, and provides that all public accounts settled against any person “shall be a first lien upon the franchises and property, both real and personal”, of such person, “from the date of settlement . . .

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

South Philadelphia State Bank's Insolvency
145 A. 520 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1929)
Arbuckle's Estate
188 A. 758 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1936)
Commonwealth v. Lowe Coal Co.
145 A. 916 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1929)
Husband's Estate
175 A. 503 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1934)
Schmuck v. Hartman
70 A. 1091 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1908)
Sweeney v. Arrowsmith
43 Pa. Super. 268 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1910)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 Pa. D. & C. 563, 1939 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/citizens-national-bank-v-nease-pactcomplwashin-1939.