{ "id": 1913431, "name": "Worthen v. Quinn", "name_abbreviation": "Worthen v. Quinn", "decision_date": "1889-05", "docket_number": "", "first_page": "82", "last_page": "84", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "52 Ark. 82" } ], "court": { "name_abbreviation": "Ark.", "id": 8808, "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court" }, "jurisdiction": { "id": 34, "name_long": "Arkansas", "name": "Ark." }, "cites_to": [ { "cite": "26 Vt., 486", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Vt.", "case_ids": [ 4428576 ], "opinion_index": -1, "case_paths": [ "/vt/26/0486-01" ] }, { "cite": "2 Yerg., 167", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Yer.", "case_ids": [ 11266005 ], "opinion_index": -1, "case_paths": [ "/tenn/10/0167-01" ] }, { "cite": "48 Ark., 355", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ark.", "case_ids": [ 1887773 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ark/48/0355-01" ] }, { "cite": "46 Ark., 73", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ark.", "case_ids": [ 1890454 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ark/46/0073-01" ] }, { "cite": "16 Lea, 40", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Lea.", "opinion_index": 0 } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 311, "char_count": 4032, "ocr_confidence": 0.72, "pagerank": { "raw": 5.7741091863397e-08, "percentile": 0.36064206832135776 }, "sha256": "5d257c522b10da813a4dfed7df4459f853d406a8647d40dd72a6594ca72bda63", "simhash": "1:adb354c27eee0187", "word_count": 721 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:24:40.922971+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [], "parties": [ "Worthen v. Quinn." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "Per Curiam :\nWhen a Collector has exhausted his remedy by warrant for the distraint of taxes due on personal property, he may resort to his remedy by suit to collect them. Mansf. Dig., sec. 5757; Rapley v. Murray, 30 Ark.; State v Hirsch, 16 Lea, 40.\nIf goods are sold by the person charged with the taxes after the lien attached, they are liable to seizure in the hands of the vendee for the satisfaction of the lien (Bridwell v. Worthen, 46 Ark., 73), and if he sells them and the Collector cannot realize the taxes otherwise, he may maintain a suit in equity against the vendee to charge the proceeds of such sale with the payment of the taxes. Dickinson v. Harris, 48 Ark., 355; Anderson v. Bowles, 44 ib., 110; Mitchell v. Badgett, 33 ib., 387.\nThe judgment of the Chancery Court will be reversed and the cause remanded, with instructions to overrule the demurrer to the complaint.", "type": "majority", "author": "Per Curiam :" } ], "attorneys": [ "W. L. Terry and T. E. Gibbon for appellant.", "Camth & Erb for appellees." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "Worthen v. Quinn.\nTaxes : When eqtiity noill enforce lien for.\nWhere goods are sold by the person in whose name they are assessed for taxation, after the lien of the State for taxes attaches thereto, and his vendee sells them, the collector, if he cannot realize the taxes otherwise, may maintain a suit in equity against the vendee to charge the proceeds of such sale with the payment of the taxes.\nAPPEAL from Pulaski Chancery Court.\nD. W. Carroll, Chancellor.\nThis is an action brought by R. W. Worthen, as Collector, in the Pulaski Chancery Court, against Quinn 8c Gray, for the \u2022collection of nine hundred and eighty-four dollars and thirty-eight cents, taxes on a twenty-five thousand dollar stock of goods, listed by Quinn Bros., who, at the time of the assessment were doing business in the City of Little Rock. Subsequent to the assessment and after the State\u2019s lien for the taxes of the year 1884, had attached, but prior to the time for the payment of taxes, said stock of goods of Quinn Bros, was exposed to sale, by virtue of a writ of execution issued out of the United States Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, and was purchased by Quinn & Gray, who disposed of the same in the ordinary course of trade. The complaint alleges that Quinn Bros, are insolvent and have no property in Pulaski County out of which said taxes or any part thereof can be made by distress or other legal process.\nThe court below dismissed the complaint on demurrer. Section 5712 Mansfield\u2019s Digest provides that \u201ctaxes assessed upon real or personal property shall bind the same and be entitled to preference over all judgments, executions, incumbrances or liens, wheresoever created,\u201d and that all taxes assessed on property shall be a lien thereon * * * until the taxes are paid. Sec. 5757, id., provides that the Collector may collect at any time all delinquent personal property tax in his county * * * \u201cby the sale of the property or otherwise.\u201d\nW. L. Terry and T. E. Gibbon for appellant.\nTaxes, though they be not \u201c debts \u201d in the strict sense, are \u25a0demands owing by the citizen to the State; they are not only enforceable against other property than that upon which they are due, but are a lien upon the articles into whosesoever hands they may come. Mans. Dig., sec. 5712. If then, they are a lien, and there is no other mode to enforce it, the remedy is in equity, as in case of landlord\u2019s liens, jj Ark., jpg; 41 Ark., ig2 ; Mansf. Dig., sec. g7g7 ; 10 Lea, 2op ; 2 Yerg., 167; j Lea-, \u00d37p; 2 Desty on Taxes, 707.\nCamth & Erb for appellees.\nThe lien on personal property is purely statutory, and the method of collection is prescribed. Mansf. Dig., secs. g7i2, 5757, 574-6, 2712.\nA tax is not a debt, and no personal action against the vendee of the property upon which the taxes are due can be maintained. 20 Cal., jgo; 2j N. W. Rep., g27; Cooley on Taxation, p. 16 ; 26 Vt., 486; 2 Dutch., jp8; Black on Tax Titles, sec. 4g.\nUnder the decision in 46 Ark., 7J, the Collector could have seized the property wherever found and sold it to satisfy the taxes, but in this case none of it could be found. See, also, ib 76 and 60 III., I7p." }, "file_name": "0082-01", "first_page_order": 110, "last_page_order": 112 }