Case ID: okla_125/html/0017-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "LESTER, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

MURRAY v. RYAN, County Treasurer.
    No. 17399.
    Opinion Filed May 17, 1927.
    (Syllabus.)
    1. Municipal Corporations — Tax Levy for Street Repair Within Maximum for Current. Expenses.
    A levy for street repair and maintenance is within the maximum limitation allowed for current expenses of the city.
    2. Same — Levy for Library Purposes.
    A levy for library purposes is within the maximum limitation allowed for current expenses of th'e city.
    Error from District Court, Oklahoma County; T. G. Chambers. Judge.
    Action by J. C. Murray against M. S. Ryan, County Treasurer of Oklahoma County. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error.
    Reversed.
    Adelbert Brown and Cordon Stater, for plaintiff in error.
    
      •Joliirli'. Martin, Municipal Counselor, for defendant in error.
   LESTER, J.

The plaintiff brought this action to recover certain taxes assessed, levied, and collected- by the defendant against his property for the fiscal year of 1925.

Judgment was rendered for the defendant, and the plaintiff prosecutes this appeal to reverse said judgment.

The levy of which the plaintiff complains consists of .98 mills for street repair and .35 mills for library purposes, piliaintiff complaining that the said levies being in excess of 6 mills allowed by law for current expenses of the city and it having been shown that no election was he'd authorizing such excessive levy.

It appears that the facts in * the record support the statement of the plaintiff; we, therefore, hold that the levies of .98 mi'ls for street repair and .35 mills for library purposes are illegal in conformity with the rule announced in the ease of Acme Milling Co. v. E. B. Bonaparte, County Treasurer, 125 Okla. 15, 255 Pac. 284, on this day de-cided by this court.

The cause is, therefore, reversed, with directions to enter judgment for the plaintiff.

MASON. V. C. J., and HARRISON, PHELPS. HUNT, and HEFNER, JJ., concur.

CLARK and RILEY, JJ., dissent.

Note. — See 28 Cyc. p. 1668 (Anno).