Case Name: The People ex rel. The Central Park, North and East River Railroad Company, App'lt, v. The Commissioners of Taxes and Assessments of the city of New York, Resp'ts
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1889-01-28
Citations: 21 N.Y. St. Rep. 350
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People ex rel. The Central Park, North and East River Railroad Company, App'lt, v. The Commissioners of Taxes and Assessments of the city of New York, Resp’ts.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 21
Pages: 350–354

Head Matter:
The People ex rel. The Central Park, North and East River Railroad Company, App'lt, v. The Commissioners of Taxes and Assessments of the city of New York, Resp’ts.
(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department,
Filed January 28, 1889.)
1. Taxes and assessments—Cobfobations—How value of stock ascek— TAINED FOB FUBPOSE OF TAXATION—LAWS 1857, CHAP. 456.
In assessing the capital stock of a corporation the assessors have a right. to resort to all the tests and measures of value which men ordinarily adopt for business purposes, in estimating and measuring values of property. They may take into account the business of the corporation, its property, the value of its assets, the amount and nature of its present and contingent liabilities, the amount of its dividends, and the market value of its shares of stock in the hands of individuals. They may resort to any or all of these, as to them seems best, and they are not confined to one of them. They may take the test which they think will be most likely to give them the actual value of the stock, and they may disregard all others. And in their estimate they are at liberty not only to consider the property and liabilities of the company, but also the value of the franchise secured to the owner as a corporation.
2. Same—Assessment upon capital stock — When commissioners warranted IN ADOPTING VALUATION.
The commissioners made their assessment at the sum of $1,696,500, placing a valuation upon the capital stock of ninety-four and one-half per cent, which was greatly below the actual value of the stock as it was stated in the report of the corporation at the sum of 130 per cent, yielding an annual dividend of eight per cent. From this amount they deducted the real estate of the company amounting in value to the sum of $510,812, this being conformable to the price paid for the real estate. They then made a further deduction of $228,246 for the tracks of the company. Besides this the amount invested in the stocks of other corporations taxed upon their capital was, also, deducted and that produced the balance of $942,142, for which the stock of the company was assessed. Held, that from the evidence the commisssioners were fully warranted in-adopting the valuation which they did as the criterion for which the relator was liable to assessment upon its capital stock.
3. Same—Debts op corporations—When not to be deducted—Laws 1857, Chap. 456,. § 3.
The company made a report to the commissioners by which it appeared that they were owing a large funded debt, and also a large floating debt. Held, that this indebtedness not being within the deductions provided for by Laws 1857, chapter 456, § 3, could not be used by way of absorbing the balance adopted by the commissioners as the amount for which the relator was assessable.
Appeal from an order affirming the action of the com • missioners of taxes and assessments, and dismissing writ of certiorari.
Delos McCurdy & B. W. Franklin, for app’lt; George S. Coleman, for resp’ts.

Opinion:
Daniels, J.
The assessment complained of by this proceeding was made of the capital stock of the relator, for the year 1883, amounting to the sum of $942,142. The objections stated in the petition were, that the relator was not liable to be assessed on its capital stock for that year, and that the assessment was made without deducting the amount paid for real estate, and that it was at a higher proportionate valuation than other real or personal property on the same roll. The commissioners in their return denied the charges of irregularity, or illegality, in making the assessment, and stated the basis on which the assessment had taken place.
The capital stock of the relator was stated to be the sum of $1,800,000, and that is conceded in the report of the company to be entirely correct. Upon this the commissioners originally made their assessment at the sum of $2.700,000 During the time prescribed for that purpose, the relator presented its complaint to them, and therein objected to the amount of this assessment. Upon a further consideration of the case they concluded to, and did reduce it to the sum of $1,696,500, placing in this manner a valuation on the relator's capital stock of ninety-four and one-quarter per cent of its par value, which was greatly below the actual value of the stock. That was stated in the report of the relator at the sum of 130 per cent, yielding an annual dividend of eight per cent. By this action it is accordingly evident that the .commissioners were more liberal to the relator in their final conclusion, than the law required them to be. The result was not erroneously reached, but was highly favorable to the relator.
From this amount the commissioners then proceeded to and did deduct the real estate of the petitioner amounting in value to the sum of $510,812. And this was conformable to the price paid for the real estate, as that was reported by the relator to the commissioners, subject only to the deduction of thirty-seven cents. The commissioners then made a further deduction of $228,246 for the tracks of the relator.
These were stated in the relator's report at the sum of $165,050 justifying, if it had been followed, both a larger assessment of the tracks as real estate and a larger deduction from the capital stock of the company than was allowed by commissioners. But no injustice was done to the relator by making the allowance for the tracks at these figures. For it appeared in the proceedings for the assessment of the real estate which were substantially consolidated with this that the tracks of the relator were assessed by the commissioners at no greater amount of value than this sum of $228,246. In both respects, therefore, injustice to the relator was carefully avoided, for the valuation of its capital stock was placed at a lower figure than the facts themselves, as they were conceded by the company, would justify, and the real estate was deducted from the reduced balance at the full amount for which it was assessed in the proceeding adopted and followed for that purpose. And the deduction of that valuation is all that had been directed by section 3 of chapter 456 of the Laws of 1857. People v. Commissioners, etc., 95 N. Y., 554.
Besides this, the amount invested in the stocks of other corporations taxed upon their capital was also deducted, and that produced the balance of $942,142 for which the stock of the company was assessed.
Evidence was taken before the referee appointed for that purpose, relating to the personal property, earnings and valuation of the stock of the company. But this evidence was very general and indefinite, supplying no substantial criterion for the government of the commissioners in making their assessment. And it certainly did not overcome the effect of the statements made m the report verified by the treasurers on the- 29th of March, 1883, stating ¡the value of the stock to be 130 per cent and the annual •dividend eight per cent.. These were facts admitted by the ¡defendant. And upon them as well as the information which the commissioners otherwise acquired, they were -supported in the conclusion which they adopted and followed, and would have been in placing a much higher valuation upon the stock than they did.
In ascertaining the valuation of property for the purpose of taxation, much has been left by the law, to the intelli,-gence and judgment of the assessors themselves. And " they have a right to resort to all the tests and measures of value which men ordinarily adopt for business purposes, in estimating and measuring values of property.
_ " They may take into account the business of the corporation, its property, the value of its .assets, the amount and' nature of its present and contingent liabilities, the amount of its dividends, and the market value of its shares of stock in the hands of individuals. They may resort to any or all of these, as to them seems best, and they are not confined to one of them. They may take that test which they think will be most likely to give them the actual value of the stock, and they may dirsegard all the others." People v. Coleman, and others, 107 N. Y., 541, 543. And in their estimate they are at liberty not only to consider the property and liabilities of the company, but also the value of the franchise secured to the owner as a corporation. People v. Commissioners, etc., 104 N. Y., 240; 5 N. Y. State Rep., 647.
From the evidence before them, as well as that taken under the order of reference, the commissioners were fully warranted in adopting the valuation which they did as the criterion for which the relator was liable to assessment upon its capital stock.
_ By the_ report which the company made to the commissioners, it appeared that they were owing a funded debt, which, with interest, amounted to the sum of $1,220,325, and •a floating debt amounting to $21,596 30. In behalf of the relator it has been urged that a deduction of these debts -.should have been made by the commissioners from the balance adopted by them. If that had been done, no residue would have remained upon which the relator would have been liable to taxation upon its capital. In the assessment of personal property for the purpose of taxation, the just debts owing by the owner have, by the revised statutes, been required to be deducted from.its full value. 1 R. S. (6th ed.),. 935-6, sec. 9 sub. 4, and sec. 10.
But the assessment of the personal property or capital of a corporation, not invested in real estate, is not made under the provisions of this statute. That was changed as to corporations by chapter 456 of the Laws of 1857.
By section 3 of that act the capital stock of the corporation is required to beassessed at its actual value, and taxed, in the same manner as other personal and real estate of the-county, after deducting therefrom such part as may have-been excepted in the assessment roll, or has been exempted' by law, together with its surplus profits or reserved funds, exceeding ten per cent of its capital, and the assessed value-of its real estate, together with the shares of stock owned" by it in other corporations taxed upon their capital stock under the laws of this state. Those are the only exceptions and deductions which the statute has provided for,. or permitted to be made. And this indebtedness not being-within the deductions in this manner provided for, could not be used by way of absorbing the balance adopted by the commissioners, as the amount for which the relator was assessable. In the case of People v. Commissioners (31 Hun, 32), the amount of indebtedness was proved as a fact to establish the conclusion that the stock of the company was of no value. And that has been sanctioned by People v. Asten (100 N. Y., 597).
But making that use of the indebtedness would not, change the liability of the relator for the amount of this-assessment. For the facts still remained, proven by its own' admissions," that the dividend made by it was eight percent, and the stock was of the value of 130 per cent. No substantial ground accordingly was presented in the case in. which the relator was entitled to any further deduction than those allowed by the commissioners. The assertion that the assessment was made at a higher proportionate-valuation than other real or personal property on the same rolls, or that it was illegal, erroneous or void for any of the reasons or causes set forth in the petition for the writ have-' been denied. And no proof has been presented in the case which would entitle the relator to any advantage under these charges contained in its petition. The case of People v. Carter (109 N. Y., 576; 16 N. Y. State Rep., 367) has' prescribed what may be done under the allegation that the valuation is proportionately higher than other property in the same roll But this authority affords no basis for any interference by the court with this assessment. The ordeishould be affirmed, together with the usual costs and disbursements
Bartlett, J., concurs.