Forrester v. Pullman Co.

15 S.E.2d 185, 192 Ga. 221, 1941 Ga. LEXIS 443
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMay 17, 1941
Docket13715.
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 15 S.E.2d 185 (Forrester v. Pullman Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Forrester v. Pullman Co., 15 S.E.2d 185, 192 Ga. 221, 1941 Ga. LEXIS 443 (Ga. 1941).

Opinion

Grice, Justice.

A State Board of Tax Appeals, consisting of the comptroller-general, the auditor, and the treasurer, ex officio, was created by section 18 of the act approved January 3, 1938. Georgia L. Ex. Sess. 1937-1938, pp. 77 et seq. Section 19 of that act declares in part that “The function of the Board of Tax Appeals shall be to review the assessments made by the State revenue commissioner when by such assessment, after hearing by the commissioner or his regularly authorized employee or agent, any taxpayer may be aggrieved and petition for said-review.” Code Ann., Cumulative Part, § 92-8421. An examination of other portions of the act of 1938, particularly those sections now codified as §§ 92-8434, 92-8445, and 92-8447, discloses that the commissioner himself has the power to determine the taxability of property; and since it is made the function of the Board of Tax Appeals to review the assessments made by the commissioner, this should be held to include not merely the amount of the tax assessment, but also whether or not the particular property was taxable. Nothing decided by this court in Columbus Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Gullatt, 189 Ga. 747 (8 S. E. 2d, 38), Allied Mortgage Companies Inc. v. Gilbert, 189 Ga. 756 (8 S. E. 2d, 45), or Gilbert v. Associated Mortgage Companies, 189 Ga. 768 (8 S. E. 2d, 46), militates *223 against this view. On the contrary, it was said arguendo in the opinion in the first of these cases that the Board of Tax Appeals was “created by the act to settle disputes as to valuation and taxability,” a statement which in our judgment is correct.

The question at issue is whether or not, under the existing laws of this State, the sleeping-cars here involved may be assessed for the purpose of county taxatiqn by the State revenue commissioner on the basis of average number and average value, such official being now vested, under the act of 1938 (Ga. L. Ex. Sess. 1937-38, pp. 77, 80) with all the power and authority theretofore vested in the comptroller-general of this State with respect to taxation, as such power and authority is modified, limited, or enlarged by that act. As was said in Pullman Co. v. Suttles, 187 Ga. 217, 222 (199 S. E. 821), on the subject of sleeping-car taxation: “The Code, § 92-5902, which embodies as part of the general law certain provisions in the general tax act of 1927 (Ga. L. 1927, p. 97), thus re-enacted in the adoption of the Code (Ga. L. 1935, p. 84), provides in terms that ‘all persons or companies owning or operating railroads . . or sleeping-cars in this State . . shall be required to make annual tax returns of all property located in this State to the comptroller-general; and the laws now in force providing for the taxation of railroads in this State shall be applicable to the assessments of taxes on the businesses above stated/ See also the general tax act of 1935 (Ga. L. 1935, p. 65). Following the sections of the Code (§§ 92-2601 et seq.) relating to returns, assessments, and payments of taxes to the comptroller-general on rolling-stock and other properties of railroads, the Code, § 92-2605, also embodying part of the general tax act of 1927 (§ 9(2), Ga. L. 1927, p. 97), further provides that: ‘Each non-resident person or company whose sleeping-cars are run in this State shall be taxed as follows: ascertain the whole number of miles of railroad over which sleeping-cars are run and the entire value of all sleeping-cars of such person or company, then tax such sleeping-cars at the regular tax rate imposed upon the property in this State on a valuation based on the proportion to the entire value of such sleeping-cars that the length of lines in this State over which such cars are run bears to the length of lines of all railroads over which such-sleeping-cars are run. The returns shall he made to the comptroller-general. . . If the taxes herein provided are not paid, *224 the comptroller-general shall issue executions against the owners of such cars, which may be levied by the sheriff of any county in this State upon the sleeping-car or cars of the owners who have failed to pay the taxes.’” While the statutes with respect to taxation of railroad-cars and sleeping-cars are distinct and are separately codified, the nature of the equipment is obviously similar; and in determining the question of taxability for county purposes as here sought, recourse may appropriately be had to the legislation affecting the rolling-stock of railroads. “Long prior to the adoption of our Code, the legislature, in the charters of certain railroad companies, limited the taxation to be imposed on their property to a certain per cent, of their net incomes, and in the case of at least one railroad, the Augusta & Savannah, to a certain per cent, of its gross income. In effect, these charters gave the companies indicated partial exemptions from taxation, and, under decisions made by the Supreme Court of the United States, are inviolable contracts between the State and the railroads.” Columbus Southern Railway Co. v. Wright, 89 Ga. 574, 578 (15 S. E. 293).

In 1874 (Ga. L. 1874, p. 107), the General Assembly enacted that from and after the passage of that act all railroad companies should annually return to the comptroller-general the value of their property, the act being codified in part (§ 92-2602) as follows: “The presidents of all the railroad companies, including street railroads, dummy railroads, and electric railroads, in this State shall be required to return on oath, annually, to the comptroller-general, the value of the property of their respective companies, without deducting their indebtedness; each class or species of property to be separately named and valued, so far as the same may be practicable, to be taxed as other property of the people of the State; and said returns shall be made under the same regulations provided by law for the returns of officers of other incorporated companies, which are required by law to be made to the comptroller-general; Provided, that the said railroads shall be taxable for city purposes as other property is taxed for city purposes, and any law making railroad companies taxable by counties will be applicable to street railroad companies of every character.” An act of 1883 (Ga. L. 1882-3, p. 42, Code, § 92-2601), specially provided for taxation of rolling-stock of railroads by apportionment, as follows: “Railroad companies operating railroads lying partly in. this State *225 and partly in other States shall be taxed as to the rolling-stock thereof and other personal property appurtenant thereto, and which is not permanently located in any of the States through which said railroads pass, on so much of the whole value of rolling-stock and personal property as the length of the railroad in this State is proportional to the whole length of the railroad, without regard to the location of the head office of such railroad companies.” After the passage of the act of 1874, supra, several cases came before the Supreme Court, involving the question whether or not counties and municipalities had the power to tax the property of railroads within their territorial limits.

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

Related

State ex rel. Chilean Nitrate Sales Corp. v. Jones
17 Fla. Supp. 121 (Escambia County Circuit Court, 1961)
Georgia Railroad & Banking Co. v. Redwine
66 S.E.2d 234 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1951)
Forrester v. Pullman Co.
19 S.E.2d 330 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1942)
Forrester v. Pullman Company
15 S.E.2d 461 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1941)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
15 S.E.2d 185, 192 Ga. 221, 1941 Ga. LEXIS 443, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/forrester-v-pullman-co-ga-1941.