Johnson v. Roberts
Citations
- 102 Ill. 655
- 1882 Ill. LEXIS 75
Syllabus
<p>1. Demurrer—what it admits—its proper office. A demurrer to a bill in chancery admits the truth of all facts properly j)leaded, but not arguments or legal conclusions stated. Its office is to determine whether the facts as stated constitute grounds for equitable relief.</p> <p>2. Chancery—bill to enjoin collection of tax—as to wrongful assessment-pursuit of remedy elsewhere. A bill in chancery to enjoin the collection of taxes on the ground of an illegal or wrongful assessment of personalty, which fails to show an equitable excuse for not seeking relief against the assessment before either the township board of review or the county board, is bad on demurrer.</p> <p>3. A bill to enjoin the collection of a personal property tax on the complainant’s engine, boiler, belting, etc., alleged that his personal property at his residence was assessed, and that he paid the tax extended on that, but failed to allege that he made and furnished a list of his personal property, or to claim that he gave in any property at his factory, where the property was as to the assessment of which complaint was made, but sought to avoid the tax on the ground the engine and boiler were a part of the realty owned by Mm, without showing their value was considered in assessing the realty, or that the boiler and engine were twice assessed: Held, that the bill failed to show a case entitling the complainant to the relief sought.</p> <p>4. Same—as to tender of the portion of the tax properly levied. A bill seeking to enjoin the collection of a portion of a tax as illegal, is defective, even if it states grounds for relief, where it fails to aver a tender of the amount of the tax admitted to be legal.</p> <p>5. Taxation—what is personalty—for purposes of taxation. For the purposes of taxation, steam engines and boilers are required by the statute to be listed and assessed as personal property, and where the assessor assesses such property as personalty, it will be presumed it was not included in t
Judges: Walker
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
10 cases in this archive cite this case.
- City of Chicago v. University of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court· 1922-02-22· cited 27×
- Fish v. McGannIllinois Supreme Court· 1903-10-26· cited 23×
- Globe Lumber Co. v. LockettSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1901-11-15· cited 16×
- United States v. RickertU.S. Circuit Court for the District of South Dakota· 1901-01-19· cited 16×
- Henderson v. Virden Coal Co.Appellate Court of Illinois· 1898-06-03· cited 9×
- Peoria, Decatur & Evansville Railway Co. v. GoarIllinois Supreme Court· 1886-10-06· cited 5×
- Thomas v. United Firemen's Ins. Co. of PhiladelphiaAppellate Court of Illinois· 1903-06-13· cited 4×
- Second Nat. Bank of Titusville v. CaldwellW.D. Pennsylvania· 1882-10-15· cited 4×
- Ward v. Township of EchoMichigan Supreme Court· 1906-07-09· cited 3×
- Raycraft v. HarrisonAppellate Court of Illinois· 1903-06-17· cited 1×
Sourced 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.