People v. Davis
Citations
- 112 Ill. 272
Syllabus
<p>1. Action—remedy to collect tax by action of debt. The right to recover a tax upon moneys and credits by an action of debt, depends upon the fact whether a valid tax is delinquent, and not upon the question of the regularity of the steps to enforce its payment through forfeiture and sale of property. The remedy in debt is cumulative, and is only barred by a prior judgment when it. is shown to have been satisfied.</p> <p>2. Pleading—of the declaration in suit to collect taxes. Whether property is taxable at a particular place is a question of law, and not of fact;, and the pleader seeking to charge one with liability, upon the ground his property is taxable at a particular place, must, therefore, state the facts from which such liability results, as a conclusion of law. An averment in a declaration that credits are liable to taxation at a certain place, is simply the statement of a legal conclusion.</p> <p>3. Taxation—moneys and credits—as to resident and non-resident owners. By the statute, moneys, credits, etc., and other personal property held, owned or controlled by persons residing in this State, are taxable. If the owner resides in this State, they are taxable at his place of residence. If he is a non-resident, and the moneys, credits, etc., and other personal property, are under the control of an agent or attorney, they shall be listed in the place where the agent or attorney is required to list his own moneys and credits and other personal property.</p> <p>4. Before a non-resident owner can be taxed in this State, it must be shown that his property is actually at the place where it is assessed; and it is not enough to show, merely, that an indebtedness to him, evidenced by a promissory note which may be in his hands, was negotiated through an agent residing at- that place. In order to the proper taxation of the moneys and credits of a non-resident at a particular place in this State, they must be under the control of an agent or attorney residing there, an
Judges: Scholfield
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
12 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Bistor v. McDonoughIllinois Supreme Court· 1932-04-08· cited 37×
- Carney v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court· 1904-06-23· cited 26×
- People ex rel. Patton v. SellarsIllinois Supreme Court· 1899-04-17· cited 18×
- Gunning v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court· 1901-02-20· cited 17×
- Walker v. JackSixth Circuit· 1898-07-07· cited 17×
- People Ex Rel. Koester v. Board of ReviewIllinois Supreme Court· 1932-12-23· cited 12×
- Bowman v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court· 1885-09-25· cited 12×
- State v. Scottish-American Mortgage Co. of EdinburghSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1899-05-02· cited 7×
- The People v. BermanIllinois Supreme Court· 1925-04-24· cited 4×
- People v. Brodsky-Palman-Gelber Co.Illinois Supreme Court· 1917-10-23· cited 2×
- Wheelock, Lovejoy & Co. v. GillIllinois Supreme Court· 1937-02-12· cited 1×
- People v. DavisIllinois Circuit Court· 1905-02-09
Cites
1 case in this archive is cited by this case.
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.