The New York herald., 1867-01-23
THE COURT S.
COURT Or ApptALs-sEp1Imssa TERM. 1861


Opinion Regarding the Legal Remedies Of
Corporations Against Taxation ON STOCK
and Deposited Securities.
The Mutual Bene Life Insurance Company, dpfsllant
the Board Of Supervisors Of the City and Cnty OF
Nesg York. respondents These actions instituted
TO test the liability Of these plaintiffs to be taxed on the
Of 500 900 deposited by them with the Comptroller
OF this State The plaintiffs corporation organized
under the laws Of the State Of New Jersey for the bus
Of life insurance. They had Office in the city OF
New York, and agent there for the Transaction or
such business. By an act Of the Legislature OF this
State, passed in 1851 lchap o5 all companies transact
ing the business OF life insurance within this State were
required 10 deposit with the Comptroller Of this State
500 900 In public stocks or bonds The Comptroller
to hold such stocks, bonds and mortgages as 50
curity for the policy holders sections and ~ Under
the provisions Of This act these plaintiffs deposited sss w @
has been included in the assessment lists Of the city OF
New York. against these plaintiffs a. so much personal
In 1855 the Board OF Supervisors Of the city and county
Of New York imposed 81 tax thereon the sum oi
$685. and tho Defendants or some Of them were pro-
ceeding to correct the same.
The nrst above entitled action commenced in The
Superior Court Of the city Of New York Tho complaint
tax was erroneous and unlawful and should be remted
corrected II also forth that the Board of Super
vsors had issued their warrant TO the defendant James
Nesb TO collect said tax and that he by virtue thereof
had levied upon the property OF said pains that the
pery Of The defendants the Msyor &c Of the city Of
New YORK The complaint prayed that the defendants
might be enjoned from collecting the tax or from in
tererng with the property levied and that the court
would adjudge that the defendants be restrained from
collecting receiving the same, for such further or
other relief, BOTH as might be just The defendants
demured 10 the complaint on ground that did not
state facts snhacent 10 constitute cause OF action
Judgment was given Tor tne deiendan.s oismsne ns M
the general term, and the plaintiffs now appeal 70 TINS
court
The second above entitled action commenced in
the Supreme Court and the complaint set out an assess
ment in the same manner and an imposition Of . tax
Otherwise contained the same facts and the same
prayer the complaint in the Superior Court.
The demurrer thereto alleged three grounds nrst that
the Supreme Court had Jurisdiction Of the subject OF
the action second that said court could not review by
complaint and injunction the proceedings Of subordinate
clothed with the exercise political powers third that
tho complaint did not state facts sufficient TO constitute
cause Of action Judgment was gwen iSr ane detena mo-
General Term, and the plaintiffs now appeal TO this
court A. c. Bradley, Of counsel for the appellants;
r O'Gormau and A. r. lawrence for the respondents.
OPINION.
LEONARD Justice The question presented in this case
piaintffs. M IAN Y r. 5s4; Haywood VS. city Of Buff
faIo Assume the complaint alleges, that the asscss
men s illegal the plaintiffs have or had at least two
been reviewed and corrected by cordri or have been
stricken from the roll by mandamus. These remedies
ant authority show cited by the learned counsel for
the respondents Where there such remedies fully
adequate the nid OF COuTt OI Equity CHnHot oc III
voked The case principally relied on by the counsel
appellants to MAINTAIN these actions was decided
in 1885, since judgments rendered in the courts
below, and is reported in 70 r, 303 the People vs.
the New England Mutual Life Insurance Company
Tha. was submitted on statement OF facts,
agreed by the respective parties under 81 Of the
Code In the court below the tax was held TO be legal
and Judgment rendered against the company for the
recovery Of the amount Upon appeal 10 this court
that judgment reversed and the assessment held TO
be illegal No objection raised to the determination
the question: the contrary both parties asked tho
determination Of legality Of the tax In the case at
bar the objection is specifically raised based upon the
decisions Of this COURT that court OF equity will not
take cosnzance or grant equitable relief by Injunction
where full relief be obtained at Law. The appel
ants cannot be aided by the decision in % N Y. r.
without ovcrturning prior authority in this conr in NO
respect Inconsistent with that decision It has been
held by this court that the act Of 1863 sesa L. ch %6
for the incorporation Of Life Insurance Companies aud
in relation the agenes OF foreign companies peals
much Of chapter 81 Of laws Of 1851 required The
deposit by foreign companies Of 600 with the Comp
troller: hut II unnecessary 10 20 into the merits OF
this question: nssmnch appears from the decisions
that relief be administered in equity where the
remedies Law adequate for the attainment Of us
tce. The judgment appealed from must be affirmed
with costs.