From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fort v. Hudson

Supreme Court of Tennessee, at Nashville, December Term, 1935
May 2, 1936
93 S.W.2d 1263 (Tenn. 1936)

Opinion

Opinion filed May 2, 1936.

1. LICENSES.

Levy of distress warrant in aid of collection of privilege tax could not be restrained, notwithstanding disproportion between amount of tax demanded and value of business against which distress warrant was issued (Code 1932, secs. 1794, 1795).

2. LICENSES.

Statute denying taxpayer right to restrain collection of tax which required taxpayer to pay amount assessed under protest, and later bring suit for its return, held constitutional (Code 1932, secs. 1794, 1795).

FROM DAVIDSON.

Appeal from Chancery Court of Davidson County. — HON. R.B.C. HOWELL, Chancellor.

Petition for certiorari and supersedeas by Erle Hudson against Dancey Fort, Commissioner of Finance and Taxation, and another. To review an order granting writs of certiorari and supersedeas, the defendants petition for certiorari and supersedeas in Supreme Court. Writs of certiorari and supersedeas sought by defendants granted, and writs of certiorari and supersedeas issued in chancery court quashed.

ROY H. BEELER, Attorney-General, NORMAN FARRELL, JACK NORMAN and L. BUCHANAN LOSER, all of Nashville, for petitioner.

DANIEL BOONE, of Nashville, for appellees.


There is no substantial difference between this case and the case of Dancey Fort, Commissioner, et al. v. Dixie Oil Company (Tenn. Sup.), 93 S.W.2d 1260, this day decided. What is therein said is controlling here.

Much complaint is made in the briefs about the disproportion between the amount of the tax demanded and the value of Hudson's business. This, however, is not an ad valorem tax, but a privilege tax. Many privilege taxes in amount exceed the value of the properties employed in the licensed business.

The provisions of sections 1794 and 1795 of the Code may work hardship in particular cases. These sections of the Code, however, do not transgress the Constitution, and, being within the competency of the Legislature, must be enforced.

This court has never disregarded these sections of the Code and undertaken to restrain the collection of a tax due the state, even an ad valorem tax, unless the assessment or the process issued to collect the tax was void, as in Tennessee Fertilizer Co. v. McFall, 128 Tenn. 645, 163 S.W. 806; Southern Express Co. v. Patterson, 122 Tenn. 279, 123 S.W. 353; Smoky Mountain Land, etc., Co. v. Lattimore, 119 Tenn. 620, 105 S.W. 1028; Briscoe v. McMillan, 117 Tenn. 115, 100 S.W. 111; Alexander v. Henderson, 105 Tenn. 431, 58 S.W. 648.

The federal courts in rare instances have gone further, but these sections of the Code were not considered binding by those tribunals.

The writs of certiorari and supersedeas sought by the commissioner and the sheriff are granted, and the writs of certiorari and supersedeas issued from the chancery court to stay the levy of the distress warrant are quashed.


Summaries of

Fort v. Hudson

Supreme Court of Tennessee, at Nashville, December Term, 1935
May 2, 1936
93 S.W.2d 1263 (Tenn. 1936)
Case details for

Fort v. Hudson

Case Details

Full title:FORT, COMMISSIONER OF FINANCE AND TAXATION, et al. v. HUDSON

Court:Supreme Court of Tennessee, at Nashville, December Term, 1935

Date published: May 2, 1936

Citations

93 S.W.2d 1263 (Tenn. 1936)
93 S.W.2d 1263

Citing Cases

Fort v. Hammett Oil Co.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE GREEN delivered the opinion of the Court. This case in the main falls under the authority…

Fort v. Dixie Oil Co.

Petitions denied. For former opinions, see Fort v. Dixie Oil Co., 93 S.W.2d 1260; Fort v. Hudson, 93 S.W.2d…