The herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1893-1900, 1895-10-11
TAXING OF SOLVENT CREDITS
The Supreme Court Holds That They
Are Liable
The Opinion In the Case Of the City OF Los
Angeles Against the State Loan
and Trust Company

Two supreme court opinions were re-
ceived at the Office of the clerk in this
city yesterday for filing.
The first is that of the city OF Los An
geles, appellant, VS.. the State Loan and
Trust company, respondent, and settles
the matter of taxation of deposits in saw
ings banks. The opinion is written by
Com missioner Haynes, ooncurred in by
Com missioners Britt and Belcher, and
affirmed by Justices Mcfarland, Hen
shaw and Temple. This is an agreed case
submitted to the superior court under
section 113S Of the code of civil procedure,
ana the controversy involves the question
whether the defendant is liable for GER
tain taxes levied and assessed aaginst it
by the city assessor for the year 1892,
amounting to $780, On the first Monday
in March. 1892 the total deposits held by
defendant amounted to $35S, S47. OF this
sum S249, 939. O1 consisted of ordinary de-
posits subject to check, or represented
by certl ficates of deposit. whio the re-
mainder, amounting to sos, 907.99. was
composed of interest bearing deposits,
the accounts of which were kept in sep
arate ledgers, one denominated savings
deposits and the other term savings
deposits, and it was upon said sum of
$10S. 907. 80 that said tax was levied and
assessed. The city assessor claimed that,
as to these last named deposits, the de-
PENDANT was either de jure or de facto
savings and loan corporation and there
lore liable for the tax under subdivision
of section 36l7 of the political code,
which subdivision, after defining the
far fGt md
follows: "But credits. claims, debts and
demands due. owing or accruing for or
on account of money deposited with saw
ings and loan corporations shall, for the
purposes OF taxation, be deemed and
treated as an interest in the property OF
such corporation, and shall not be as
sessed to the creditor or owner thereof"
Upon the facts set forth, the court below
held that the defendant was not a savings
and loan association either de jure or de
facto, and that the deposits in question
should not be assessed or treated 40 the
property of the bank. but should be taxed
to the several depositors as ordinary COM
mercal deposits. The opinion further
says: Appended to respondents brief
is found the opinion OF the learned Judge
who heard the case, and in which the
ground upon which the decision is based
logic of the opinion 10 faultless. IT the
major premise be conceded the conclusion
is inevitable" But the major premise
is not conceded bv the supreme court,
and, after reviewing the case at some
length, and quoting numerous authori-
ties, the opinion concludes as follows:
Our conclusion is, without deciding
whether the respondent was leaglly an-
thorize1 to transact the business of saw
ings corporation, that as to the part OF it's
business in controversy, 1t was de faote a
savings corporation, and that the taxes
in question were prop,rIy levied and as
sessed. The said tax having been col.
lected by the city, the Judgment appealed
from should be reversed and the agreed
case dismissed"
In the case of John Maddox, admin
istrator of the estate of Lawrence WEIGH,
deceased, VS.. W. H. Russell ct al. the
opinion is written by Commissioner
Searls and Haynes and affirmed by
Justices Mcfarland, Henshaw and Tenn
pie. There are two appeals in this case,
one by plaintiff from the judgment, the
other by defendants from the judgment
and an order denying their molten for q
court allowed him to recover less than ne
was entitled to have. and the defendants
insisting that he should have recovered
nothing at all. The suit grew out of a
land deal In 1887, in which 5000 is IN.
VOWED. Lawrence WEIGH and wife sold
containing 1929 acres. There was some
question as to the boundaries, and
WEIGH guaranteed to defend the title, and
in case any of the said land was take en-.
to rein burse the purchasers at the rate of
5000 per acre, with 10 per cent interest
from the date of the sale. In the suit
TO- 50 acres was recovered from the tract
sold. After reviewing the whole case at
length, the opinion concludes: 'For the
reasons given In this opinion the order
denying defendants motion for a new
trial is affirmed, and the cause remanded
with instructions to the court below to
modify it's conclusions of law on the
findings so as to omit therefrom any de-
auctions in the nature of set-off against
the am cunt found due to plaintiff on the
notes in suit. and to modify the judg-
ment so as to direct the recovery By
plaintiff OF the full amount found due to
him without abatement on account OF
SAID deductions, and SO modified the
iudment is affirmed