Summary
In Empire Pipe Line Co. v. Excise Board of Carter County, 164 Okla. 126, 23 P.2d 189, where the protesting taxpayer sought to have the school district levy reduced by reason of funds in the hands of the county treasurer which had been apportioned to the independent school district, but had not been paid over to the treasurer of the district, we held that the funds not being in the possession of the treasurer of the independent school district could not be considered in the financial statement.
Summary of this case from Mid-Continent Pipe Line v. Creek Cty. Excise Bd.Opinion
No. 23475
Opinion Filed June 13, 1933.
(Syllabus.)
1. Taxation — Proceeding in Court of Tax Review Equitable in Nature — Review — Judgment on Question of Fact not Supported by Evidence.
A proceeding before the Court of Tax Review partakes of the nature of an equitable proceeding, and a judgment of that court on a question of fact wil be reversed where it is clearly beyond the weight of the evidence.
2. Same — Schools and School Districts — Appropriations for School purposes — Estimated Income Limited to Amount of Actual Collections From Such Sources for Previous Fiscal Year.
In making an appropriation, the excise board is without authority to consider estimated income in an amount in excess of the actual collections from such sources for the previous fiscal year, and, where an appropriation is made for school purposes, the maximum amount of estimated income to be considered is the actual amount collected from that source for the school fund for the previous fiscal year.
3. Same — Funds in County Treasury Apportioned to Independent District but not Paid to School Treasurer not Considered in Financial Statement and Estimated Needs.
Funds in the hands of a county treasurer which have been apportioned by him to an independent school district, but which have not been paid to the treasurer of the independent school district, may not be considered in the financial statement and estimated needs for the ensuing fiscal year.
Appeal from Court of Tax Review; Porter Newman, Asa E. Walden, and O.C. Wybrant, Judges.
In the matter of the protest of the Empire Pipe Line Company, the Phillips Petroleum Company, the Prairie Oil Gas Company, the Prairie Pipe Line Company, the Stanolind Pipe Line Company, and the Texas Company against the Excise Board of Carter County. Protest denied as to certain items of tax levy, and protestant appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions.
Hunt Eagleton, for plaintiff in error.
Marvin Shilling, Co. Atty., and Eugene Jordan, for defendant in error.
This is an appeal by the protestants from a of the Court of Tax Review denying their protest as to certain tax levies for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1931.
The plaintiffs in error contend that there was error on the part of the Court of Tax Review in denying their protest as to the general fund of Carter county, in which they assert that a surplus of $9,654.57 was not considered that there was error in denying their protest as to the county highway fund, in which they assert that there was a surplus of $3,000.98 which was not considered, and that there was error in denying their protest as to the county separate school fund, in which they assert that there was a balance of $1,146.98 which was not considered. The defense to those items by the defendant in error is that those items involve questions of fact and that the judgment of the Court of Tax Review is sustained by the evidence. We have carefully examined the evidence shown by the record in this case, and we find that the judgment of the Court of Tax Review is not sustained by the evidence. In re Bliss et al. 142 Okla. 1, 285 P. 73; In re Protest of Chicago, R.I. P. Ry. Co., 143 Okla. 217, 289 P. 352; Protest of Missouri-Kansas-Texas Ry. Co., 149 Okla. 166, 300 P. 713; In re St. Louis-S. F. Ry. Co., 151 Okla. 126, 2 P.2d 944, and Protest of Bledsoe et al. 161 Okla. 227, 17 P.2d 979.
It is evident from the record that the balances claimed by the plaintiffs in error to have been on hand were actually on hand and that they were disregarded. The judgment of the Court of Tax Review on those three items is reversed.
The plaintiffs in error contend that there was error on the part of the Court of Tax Review in denying their protest as to the general fund of independent school district No. 19. The record shows that in computing the rate of levy for that fund an item was included in the computation for estimated income in an amount $1,297.80 in excess of the amount of estimated income received during the preceding year. That amount was in the hands of the county treasurer and had been apportioned to the school district on the 30th day of June. 1931, but it had not been paid to the school district treasurer. Under the provision of section 12678, O. S. 1931, and the decisions of this court in Protest of Chicago, R.I. P. Ry. Co., 150 Okla. 167, 1 P.2d 383, In re Protest of Chicago, R.I. P. Ry. Co. 151 Okla. 137, 1 P.2d 674, and In re Bliss et al., supra, the amount estimated was excessive. The judgment of the Court of Tax Review on this item is reversed.
The cause is remanded to the Court of Tax Review, with directions to enter judgment in conformity herewith.
It is further ordered that the time for filing a petition for rehearing herein is limited to ten days from this date.
RILEY, C. J., CULLISON, V. C. J., and SWINDALL, McNEILL, BAYLESS, BUSBY. and WELCH, JJ., concur. OSBORN, J., absent.