Benn v. Slaymaker

Citations

• 93 Kan. 64
• 143 P. 503
• 1914 Kan. LEXIS 383

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Taxation — Partnership Property — Excessive Valuation — Application to Reduce Valuation Too Late. On April 12, 1912, the managing partner of a firm returned its personal property for taxation. No steps were taken to correct the valuation which he placed on the property until April 22, 1918, when the passive partner filed a petition with the tax commission to reduce the valuation, alleging that the valuation was excessive and was made so with intent on the part of the managing partner to defraud him. The tax commission ruled that it had no authority to grant the desired relief. Held, the ruling was correct.</p> <p>2. Same — Excessive Assessment Not Deemed Fraudulent— Court of Equity No Jurisdiction to Correct When Statutory Tribunal Provided. The decision in the case of Finney County v. Bullard, 77 Kan. 849, 94 Pac. 129, that an assessment is not deemed fraudulent, merely because it is excessive, and that a court of equity has no jurisdiction under its general power to correct an unequal or unjust assessment when a statutory board has been provided for that purpose, approved and followed.</p>