Miller v. Norblad

Oregon Supreme Court

Miller v. Norblad

295 P. 461, 292 P. 822, 135 Or. 212, 1930 Ore. LEXIS 150

DecidedSeptember 9, 1930

StatusPublished

This text of 295 P. 461 (Miller v. Norblad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Miller v. Norblad, 295 P. 461, 292 P. 822, 135 Or. 212, 1930 Ore. LEXIS 150 (Or. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

EOSSMAN, J.

The plaintiff is a resident of this state who received in 1929 gross receipts from the income of intangible personal property of the kind affected by General Laws of Oregon, 1929, chapter 429, inore than $200, some of which was interest paid on notes secured by real estate mortgages. The complaint alleges that the defendants are threatening to enforce the tax imposed by the above mentioned act which is fully described in Redfield et al. v. Fisher, this day decided by us [ante p. 180] and that they refuse to recognize the validity and the existence of Ore *213 gon Laws, §4235, which provides: “The following property shall he exempt from taxation: * * * ‘9. All notes secured by recorded mortgages on real property.’ ” The complaint, after alleging the invalidity of chapter 429, prays that it be declared invalid and that the court restrain its enforcement. The defendants filed a demurrer which recited that the allegations of the complaint were insufficient to state a cause of suit. It was sustained and subsequently the court entered a decree dismissing the suit; the plaintiff appealed.

This suit brings before us substantially the same situation present in Kiernan v. Norblad, this day decided by us [ante p. 210] with the exception that in addition to the issues present in that case we are also called upon to determine whether General Laws of Oregon, 1929, chapter 429, repealed Oregon Laws, § 4235, subd. 9. In view of the fact that in Redfield et al. v. Fisher we held chapter 429 invalid, it necessarily follows that the plaintiff’s intangibles are not subject to the tax imposed by chapter 429. The cause will be remanded to the circuit court with instructions to enter a decree in harmony with the prayer of the complaint.

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

EOSSMAN, J.

The plaintiff is a resident of this state who received in 1929 gross receipts from the income of intangible personal property of the kind affected by General Laws of Oregon, 1929, chapter 429, inore than $200, some of which was interest paid on notes secured by real estate mortgages. The complaint alleges that the defendants are threatening to enforce the tax imposed by the above mentioned act which is fully described in Redfield et al. v. Fisher, this day decided by us [ante p. 180] and that they refuse to recognize the validity and the existence of Ore *213 gon Laws, §4235, which provides: “The following property shall he exempt from taxation: * * * ‘9. All notes secured by recorded mortgages on real property.’ ” The complaint, after alleging the invalidity of chapter 429, prays that it be declared invalid and that the court restrain its enforcement. The defendants filed a demurrer which recited that the allegations of the complaint were insufficient to state a cause of suit. It was sustained and subsequently the court entered a decree dismissing the suit; the plaintiff appealed.

This suit brings before us substantially the same situation present in Kiernan v. Norblad, this day decided by us [ante p. 210] with the exception that in addition to the issues present in that case we are also called upon to determine whether General Laws of Oregon, 1929, chapter 429, repealed Oregon Laws, § 4235, subd. 9. In view of the fact that in Redfield et al. v. Fisher we held chapter 429 invalid, it necessarily follows that the plaintiff’s intangibles are not subject to the tax imposed by chapter 429. The cause will be remanded to the circuit court with instructions to enter a decree in harmony with the prayer of the complaint.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

295 P. 461, 292 P. 822, 135 Or. 212, 1930 Ore. LEXIS 150, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-norblad-or-1930.