Ouachita County v. Rumph
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Ouaehita Circuit Court. Hon. B. E. Askew Circuit Judge. Promissory notes given for the purchase of land are subject to taxation. They are property within the meaning of the Constitution, and the Revenue Act of 1883, and hence taxable. Const. Art. 16 Sec. 5, Art. 2 Deck of Bights, Secs. 2 and 20; Gantt’s Big. Secs. 1529-30; Probst & Hilb v. Scott 31 Ark. 656; Bouvier Law Bid. - 4 Pet. 511; 17 Johnson 283; 2 Kent p. 406 note A. 9th Ed; Bouv. Inst.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Ouaehita Circuit Court. Hon. B. E. Askew Circuit Judge. Promissory notes given for the purchase of land are subject to taxation. They are property within the meaning of the Constitution, and the Revenue Act of 1883, and hence taxable. Const. Art. 16 Sec. 5, Art. 2 Deck of Bights, Secs. 2 and 20; Gantt’s Big. Secs. 1529-30; Probst & Hilb v. Scott 31 Ark. 656; Bouvier Law Bid. - 4 Pet. 511; 17 Johnson 283; 2 Kent p. 406 note A. 9th Ed; Bouv. Inst. Vol. 1, Sec. 481, 468; Story on Const. Sec. 400; 1 Black. Com. 59; 43 Cal. 331; 13 Am. Bep. 143; 21 Id. 704; 2 Com. 806; 1 Green 240; 11…
1Opinion of the CourtEakin, J.
At the July term 1883, the appellee, Rumphj' applied to the county court, by way of appeal from theBoaid of Equalization, to correct his assessment of personal property for taxation, showing : That-in the preceding January he had sold and conveyed to Patrick Gaughan, certain lots in Camden for five thousand dollars, and taken notes for four thousand dollars of the purchase money, secured by deed of trust on the land ; that the lands had been assessed at their proper value to Gaughan; and that the notes had also been assessed in the name of petitioner against his protest. Pie insisted that…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Probst & Hilb v. ScottSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1877
- Winter & Co. v. SimpsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1883
3Cited by5 opinions
- City of Marquette v. Michigan Iron & Land Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1903
- Morley, Comm'r of Revenues v. RemmelSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1949
- Hartford-Connecticut Trust Co. v. O'CONNORSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1950
- Hartford-Connecticut Trust Co. v. O'CONNORSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1950
- Sims v. AhrensSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1925