From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barber v. Potter

Supreme Court of Rhode Island. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
Jan 1, 1864
8 R.I. 15 (R.I. 1864)

Opinion

FEBRUARY TERM, 1864.

PRESENT : HON. SAMUEL AMES, CHIEF JUSTICE, HON. GEORGE A. BRAYTON, HON. J. RUSSELL BULLOCK, JUSTICES.

One who has ceased to be an inhabitant of the State, at the time of the assessment of a tax, is not liable to be taxed for personal property in the town in which he formerly resided; the 10th section of Ch. 38, of the Revised Statutes having application only to inhabitants of the State.

THIS was an amicable action on the case, brought by the collector of taxes in South Kingstown, against the defendant, to submit to the Court the question, whether the latter was liable to be taxed in South Kingstown for personal property, in the year 1861. The facts agreed were, that the defendant, who had theretofore resided in South Kingstown, on the 19th day of December, 1860, became a resident of New York; that the tax in question was ordered June 4th, 1861, assessed October 7th, 1861, and made payable December 1st, 1861. The defendant had resided in South Kingstown the larger portion of the twelve months next preceding the first day of April, 1861.

E.R. Potter informed the Court that the collector claimed the tax under the provisions of the 10th section of Ch. 38 of the Revised Statutes; but suggested that this section had application only to inhabitants of the State.


The first section of Ch. 37 of the Revised Statutes provides, that all personal property belonging to the inhabitants of the State shall be liable to taxation, unless otherwise provided. The 10th section of Ch. 38 of the Revised Statutes affords the test by which it shall be decided, in what town of the State an inhabitant of the State shall be assessed for his personal property. It has no application to the case of the defendant, who had ceased to be an inhabitant of this State, and had become a citizen of the State of New York, before this tax was assessed. Not being an inhabitant of the State at the time this tax was assessed, he was not liable to be taxed for personal estate, in general, in any town. According to the agreement, judgment must be entered for the defendant, without costs.


Summaries of

Barber v. Potter

Supreme Court of Rhode Island. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
Jan 1, 1864
8 R.I. 15 (R.I. 1864)
Case details for

Barber v. Potter

Case Details

Full title:HENRY BARBER, Collector, v. ASA POTTER

Court:Supreme Court of Rhode Island. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON

Date published: Jan 1, 1864

Citations

8 R.I. 15 (R.I. 1864)

Citing Cases

Anthony v. Caswell

These provisions accord with the usual rule that real estate shall be taxed where it is situated, and…