Buttenuth v. St. Louis Bridge Co.
Citations
- 123 Ill. 535
- 17 N.E. 439
Syllabus
<p>1. Taxation—over-valuation—remedy—misleading statements of assessor. Where an excessive assessment of property for taxation is the result of a mere honest error in judgment on the part of the assessor making the same, a court of chancery has no jurisdiction to afford the party aggrieved any relief.</p> <p>2. The statute affords a party aggrieved the only remedy for an excessive valuation of his property for the purposes of taxation, unless it is fraudulently assessed too high. If the assessment is completed before that time, the application to reduce the same must be made, under the 86th section of the Bevenue act, to the town board on the fourth Monday of June.</p> <p>3. If the party assessed is told by the assessor, about the time such board meets, that he has not completed his assessment, and is thus misled, and prevented from appearing before that board, he should apply for relief to the county board under the 97th section of the Bevenue law, and show, by explicit evidence, a good reason for not having applied to the town board.</p> <p>4. Proof of the statement of the assessor that the assessment was made after the fourth Monday in June, made in a casual conversation, when not engaged in any official act relating to the assessment, is not competent evidence to prove when the assessment was in fact made or completed, and will not excuse a'party assessed from making application to the town board of review.</p> <p>5. Where a party aggrieved by an over-valuation of his property by the local assessor for taxation, fails to apply to the town board of review for a reduction at the proper time, the assessment then being completed, and no good reason is shown for such failure, this will justify the county board in refusing to grant him relief, and having lost his legal remedy, he can have no relief in a court of equity, except where the assessment is fraudulently made too high.</p> <p>6. State boundaby—ari/oer the boimdar'J between States—as, Illinois and Missouri. Wh
Judges: Scott
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.