Natalbany Lumber Co. v. Tax Collector

Citations

• 123 La. 174
• 48 So. 879
• 1909 La. LEXIS 690

Syllabus

<p>1. List eor Taxation.</p> <p>Due return had been made by the tax assessor. It was sworn to by the owner, an'd accepted as correct by the assessor and by the board of reviewers.</p> <p>2. Assessment Increased.</p> <p>An order was issued to the assessor, in accordance with the direction of the state board of equalization, to increase the amount of the assessment.</p> <p>3. Classification of Lands.</p> <p>Upon this order the assessor undertook to change plaintiff’s assessment by taking lands assessed in classes B and C and placing them in class A. The land in each class had a separate value.</p> <p>4. Lands of Different Value.</p> <p>The assessor did not examine the land before making the change and satisfy himself that, in thus assessing them, classes B and C were of equal value with the land in class A. In fact, they were not.</p> <p>5. Assessment of Lands.</p> <p>The testimony shows that the lands were properly assessed at the first. There was no possibility of assessing them in the manner attempted when the change was made.</p> <p>6,. Taxation (§ 450*) — Equalization of Assessments — Increase of Valuation.</p> <p>In order to comply with the statute, it is necessary to preserve the principle of separate rate for each class of property.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Taxation, Dec. Dig. § 450.*]</p> <p>7. Failure to Appeal.</p> <p>An order of appeal was entered in the name of the hoard of equalization, of which the ■Board did not avail itself.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>