Taxation of Instruments

57 Pa. D. & C. 335
CourtPennsylvania Department of Justice
DecidedSeptember 10, 1946
StatusPublished

This text of 57 Pa. D. & C. 335 (Taxation of Instruments) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Department of Justice primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Taxation of Instruments, 57 Pa. D. & C. 335 (Pa. 1946).

Opinion

Chronister and Rutter,

Deputy Attorneys General,

You have requested an opinion as to the taxability of certain instruments and proceedings under the provisions of section 3 of the Act of April 6, 1830, P. L. 272, 72 PS §3172, which reads in part as follows:

“The prothonotaries of the courts of common pleas and of the district courts, and the prothonotary of the supreme court having original jurisdiction and the court of nisi prius of this commonwealth, shall demand and receive on every original writ issued out of said courts, (except the writ of habeas corpus), and on the entry of every amicable action, the sum of fifty cents; . . . on every entry of a judgment by confession or otherwise, where suit has not been previously commenced,-the sum of fifty cents; . .

You inform us that a difference of opinion exists among the various prothonotaries as to which proceedings and instruments are taxable under the statute, and you have submitted a list of the disputed proceedings and instruments attached to your request. Although this list does not in every instance designate the precise writ, amicable action or judgment concerning which a question has been raised, we will answer them in the order given.

First of all, however, reference is made to our opinion to you dated June 2, 1910, Original Writs, 37 Pa. [336]*336C. C. 522. This opinion construed the words “original writ” as used in the statute to mean “the first process or judicial instrument by which the court commands something, therein mentioned, to be done”.

In determining the taxable status of the various classes of writs enumerated it is important to differentiate between writs of original process and writs of mesne or intermediate process: the former are taxable; the latter are not.

1. Breve de partitione facienda.

This writ is mesne. process. The action of partition is commenced by a writ of summons. In the course of the action the court may enter judgment quod partitio fiat, i. e., that partition be made. Upon this judgment the breve de partitione facienda issues, commanding the sheriff and his inquest to divide or value the premises. Being mesne process, the writ is not taxable. It should be noted that this action is extremely rare.

Partition may also be had in equity, in which case the endorsed bill or summons would be the original process, and would be taxable.

2. Summons in assumpsit upon ground rent.

This writ is original process and therefore taxable, as is the writ of summons in assumpsit for any other cause of action. The remedy was formerly by writ of covenant, which was abolished by the Act of May 25, 1887, P. L. 271,12 PS §1, Shermet v. Embick, 90 Pa. Superior Ct. 269. The present remedy is assumpsit.

3. Fraudulent debtors’ attachment.

The Act of March 17, 1869, P. L. 8, and the Act of May 24,1887, P. L. 197,12 PS §2711, provide for the Commencement of actions against fraudulent debtors by writ of attachment. The writ is original process and therefore taxable.

4. Garnishment.

a. Attachment execution. This is a writ which issues upon a judgment against A seeking to acquire certain [337]*337rights of A against B, the garnishee, who was not a party to the judgment. As to A it is a writ of execution, but as to B, the garnishee, it is original process (Kennedy v. Agricultural Insurance Co., 165 Pa. 179), and therefore taxable.

6. Foreign attachment. This is a writ to attach property of a nonresident in the hands of a resident, the garnishee. It may be used to commence an action against the nonresident and in any case is original process against the garnishee, and therefore taxable.

c. Domestic attachment. This is an original writ against a debtor who absconds or conceals himself, and operates for the benefit of all his creditors. Act of June 13,1836, P. L. 606,12 PS §2741 et seq. As it is original process both as to the debtor and the garnishee, it is taxable.

5. Estrepement.

This is a writ to preserve real property from waste or injury. Whether or not it is original or mesne process must be determined separately in each case. If it arises out of a pending action (usually ejectment), it is mesne process and not taxable. Otherwise it is taxable.

6. Error.

The writ of error was one of three methods of appeal employed prior to the passage of the Act of May 9, 1889, P. L. 158, 12 PS §1131. While preserving the distinction between the writ of error, certiorari, and statutory appeal, the act directed that all such proceedings in the Supreme Court should be taken in a proceeding to be called an appeal. The tax on appeals is abolished by Section 3 of the Act of May 19, 1897, P. L. 67,12 PS §1135.

A writ of error coram vobis is for the purpose of acting on a judgment previously rendered, similarly to the granting of a new trial. It is therefore not original process and is not taxable.

7. Attachment for contempt.

[338]*338This writ issues only where the person to be attached has failed to obey an existing order of the court, and must generally be based upon a previous rule to show cause why the writ should not issue. Thus it is apparent that the writ is mesne or intermediate process and not taxable.

8. Citation.

There are several writs of citation which issue out of the courts of common pleas, probably the most common of which is the citation provided in the Act of April 20, 1905, P. L. 239, §1, 12 PS §2571. This act provides that purchasers of real estate at judicial sales and their grantees, heirs and devisees, have certain rights, remedies and duties in acquiring possession of said real estate. Citation will issue to the person in possession to appear and show cause why possession of-real estate should not be delivered to the purchaser.

It is our opinion that where the persons in possession are other than the defendants in the original execution or order of sale, the citation is original process within the meaning of the language of the Act of Assembly in question and is, therefore, taxable. Where the persons in possession are the defendants under the original execution or order of sale, the citation then assumes the character of an execution writ rather than one of original process and, accordingly, would not be taxable.

9. Capias.

a. Capias ad respondendum is original process against the person of the defendant to compel him to appear and is taxable.

b. Capias ad satisfaciendum is a writ of execution upon a judgment and is not taxable.

10. Dower.

The common-law writ for recovery of dower in Pennsylvania is the writ of “dower unde nihil habet”. It is a real action against the tenant of the freehold which is instituted by the filing of a praecipe for the issuance of [339]*339the writ. The writ is the original process in the proceedings and, therefore, is taxable.

11. Injunction.

An injunction is not original process and is not taxable. Suits in equity may be begun “. . .

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

Related

Shermet v. Embick
90 Pa. Super. 269 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1926)
Kennedy v. Agricultural Ins.
30 A. 724 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
57 Pa. D. & C. 335, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taxation-of-instruments-padeptjust-1946.