Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

51 Miss. 27

Tuttle v. Everett

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided October 15, 1875

Mississippi Supreme Court · decided 1875-10-15

Hon. H. O. Davis, Judge. Defendant in error brought suit in the justice’s court against plaintiff in error as tax collector of Carroll county to recover $73.37, the amount of taxes by him illegally paid. The justice gave judgment for plaintiff in his court, and the defendant took an appeal to the circuit court, where a trial was had, with a like result, and the case comes to this court on writ of error.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1875-10-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1970

12 state decisions

3018751880189019001910192019301940195019601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Peyton, C. J.,

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2This was a suit brought by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error, to recover the sum of $73.37, paid by the said T. C. Everett as taxes to the said L. Tuttle as tax collector of Carroll county.

¶3It is insisted on the part of the plaintiff in error that the taxes were voluntarily paid, and for that reason cannot be recovered back from the tax collector. This would a be correct legal proposition, where the property is properly taxable,- and there was a mere irregularity in the levy or collection of the tax. But where the assessment and levy of the tax is illegal and void, the tax paid to the collector may be .recovered back by the tax payer from the *28tax collector, whilst the same remains in his hands. This is in accordance with reason, principle and authority. Blackwell in his valuable work on Tax Titles says: “ Where a county or other local corporation levy a tax which is illegal, and the citizen pays the tax to one who has a formal authority to collect it, the payment is not voluntary but compulsive, and an action will lie against the collector to recover it back, unless he has paid it over to his superiors, in which event the action must be brought against the corporation.” Blackwell, 187, top page, 4th ed.

¶4The case of Hawkins et al. v. The Board of Supervisors of Carroll County, 50 Miss., 735, shows that the assessment and levy of the tax was unauthorized by law, and was therefore null and void. If the assessment be made in violation of law, it is a void act, the collector, in enforcing its collection, is trespasser. Blackw. on Tax Titles, 156 star page. And this doctrine is maintained in the case of Coulson v. Harris, 43 Miss., 751.

¶5In the case under consideration the tax was illegally collected by the plaintiff in error, under color of authority from the defendant in error, the tax payer, who properly recovered a judgment for the same in the court below.

¶6The railroad is not entitled to the money in controversy, neither is the tax collector entitled to it, it must, therefore, belong to him from whom it was illegally collected.

¶7We think the judgment is right, and ought to be affirmed.

¶8Judgment is affirmed.

/51/miss/27 · .json · Public domain