Case ID: walker_1/html/0199-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

BRIGGS’ APPEAL.
    Taxes assessed on real estate for state, county and poor purposes, have not priority over all other liens.
    Appeal from the Common Pleas of Crawford County, No. 309 October and November Term, 1880..
    On February 2, 1877, Coburn, a furniture merchant in Mead-ville, assigned his real and personal property to Coder for benefit of creditors. The assignee took possession and sold the personal property in a few months, and obtained an order of Court, and tried to sell the real estate, but did not do so until May 9th, 1879. The real estate was assessed in the name of Coburn from 1877 till the assignee’s sale in 1879. Coburn paid the taxes for 1877 and 1878. The County Commissioners levied a county, state and poor tax in January, 1879, and appointed B. H. Briggs collector.
    Briggs demanded the taxes from the assignee and afterwards claimed them before the Auditor.'
    When the assignment was made there were mortgages and judgments' against the property, which were more than sufficient to take the whole fund.
    There were municipal liens entered January 10 and 21, 1879, under Act of April 6,1870. By Act of April 6,1870, P. Laws 972, Section 8, the city taxes are made a lien upon real estate until paid. The property was sold free from all liens. The Auditor decided that the city taxes should bé paid in full, and awarded the balance to the lien creditors, awarding nothing to the municipal liens or to Briggs. Briggs excepted to the report, but the Court overruled the exceptions and confirmed report in the following opinion, delivered July 10,1880 by
    Church, P. J.:
    “It has never been held in this Commonwealth that the tax laws, regulating the collection of state and county taxes, made such taxes a prior lien upon the real estate of the taxable, and as such entitled to participate in the proceeds of a sheriff’s sale of said property, nor of the sheriff’s sale of personal property. An assignee’s sale under existing laws, is in no different situation.
    A tax collector is given ample remedies for the prompt collection of taxes when he has a warrant for that purpose placed in his hands. It is his own fault if he does not pursue these remedies. If he remains supine in the performance of his duty, and permits other and more active creditors to step in before him he has only himself to blame. Careful attention to duty by tax collectors would not only relieve themselves of responsibility, but would keep the “wheels of government” well and sufficiently lubricated.
    Exceptions overruled, report confirmed, and distribution accordingly.”
    Briggs appealed from this decree and it was argued in his behalf by Thomas Roddy, Esq.:
    
    That taxes upon seated lands have now the same lien as taxes on unseated lands; Act 26, April, 1844, P. Laws 501; Act March 12, 1869, P. Laws 340 ; Act April 3,1804,. 4 Sm. Laws 201; Act March 22, 1850, P. Laws 306; Act April 14,1840, P. Laws 351.
    A sale for taxes discharges all liens; Pager vs. Campbell, 5 Watts, 287; Kelso vs. Kelly, 2 Harris, 204. A tax is a lien and encumbrance; Densmore vs. Haggerty, 9 Smith, 189.
    Gormley’s appeal, 3 Casey, 49, is disapproved in Philadelphia vs. Cooke, 6 Casey, 56.
    The powers of a city are to be found in its charter, but it is otherwise in reference to a county; Hamilton County vs. Mighels, 7 Ohio State Rep., 109 ; Freeze vs. Columbia County, 6 W.N. C., 146.
    Property is liable to taxation in the hands of an assignee for creditors; Wright vs. Wigton, 3 Norris, 163.
   On January 3, 1881, the Supreme Court affirmed the decree of the Court below in the following opinion :

Per Curiam.

Land held by a voluntary assignee for the benefit of creditors is undoubtedly liable to taxation; Wright et al. vs. Wigton, 3 Norris, 163. As a general rule, however, taxes assessed upon land are not a preferred lien thereon. It requires an act of Assembly expressly so declaring them, to give that preference. No act is cited giving such preference, except as to city taxes assessed upon real estate. We are asked to go further, and declare that taxes assessed on real estate for state, county and- poor purposes, have a prior claim over all other liens against the real estate in the distribution of the proceeds of a sale thereof. We know no authority to sustain this view.

The warrant of a collector of taxes is no lien on personal property before actual seizure; Idem, 166. It therefore follows this decree is right.

Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed at the costs of the appellant.

Note. — A sale of unseated land for taxes divests the lien of a first mortgage; Fager vs. Campbell, 5 Watts, 287. But it is otherwise if the land is seated; Perry vs. Brinton, 1 Harris, 202; Cadmus vs. Jackson, 2 P. F. S., 304; Building Ass. vs. Lea, 4 Out., 210; Fisher vs. Connard, 4 Out., 63.