{ "id": 5598050, "name": "The People ex rel. Will L. Talbott, County Collector, v. The Indiana, Illinois and Iowa Railroad Company", "name_abbreviation": "People ex rel. Talbott v. Indiana, Illinois & Iowa Railroad", "decision_date": "1903-12-16", "docket_number": "", "first_page": "612", "last_page": "614", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "206 Ill. 612" } ], "court": { "name_abbreviation": "Ill.", "id": 8772, "name": "Illinois Supreme Court" }, "jurisdiction": { "id": 29, "name_long": "Illinois", "name": "Ill." }, "cites_to": [ { "cite": "147 Ill. 9", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill.", "case_ids": [ 833765 ], "opinion_index": -1, "case_paths": [ "/ill/147/0009-01" ] }, { "cite": "194 Ill. 51", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill.", "case_ids": [ 5582510 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill/194/0051-01" ] }, { "cite": "147 Ill. 9", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill.", "case_ids": [ 833765 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill/147/0009-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 251, "char_count": 4717, "ocr_confidence": 0.609, "pagerank": { "raw": 2.3181068408277913e-07, "percentile": 0.7894668762541754 }, "sha256": "9d92a8846d11f488d84d2b806cf6a280a09a3f56511e1d7dc0816cbff6a051d1", "simhash": "1:0727eae32707149c", "word_count": 836 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:04:32.167718+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [], "parties": [ "The People ex rel. Will L. Talbott, County Collector, v. The Indiana, Illinois and Iowa Railroad Company." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "Mr. Justice Scott\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nThis was an application by appellant, made to the county court of Livingston county, for judgment against the real estate of appellee for delinquent taxes of the year 1902. Appellee filed objections to the town taxes of the towns of Sunbury, Nevada and Round Grove, in that county, amd the court, by a judgment entered at the June term, 1903, sustained these objections.\nThe certificate of levy made by the town clerk of each town was introduced in evidence, and in each instance the only purpose stated for which the tax was levied is \u201cfor town purposes.\u201d The record of the annual town meeting in each of the three towns was introduced. The record of the- meeting in Sunbury shows a levy of a tax without specifying its purpose. The record of each of the town meetings in Round Grove and Nevada shows the levy of a tax \u201cfor town purposes.\u201d We have held that the designation of such a tax as a tax \u201cfor town purposes\u201d is not sufficient. (People v. Chicago and Alton Railroad Co. 194 Ill. 51.) The certificate of the clerk in each instance was\" for the exact amount of tax levied at the town meeting, and seems to have been made for the purpose of certifying that levy to the county clerk.\nAppellant, for the purpose of sustaining these taxes, offered in evidence the record of the board of auditors in each of the towns in question for the meetings of September, 1901, and March, 1902, showing the claims audited at those meetings,, the aggregate audited at the two meetings being, in the case of each town, greater in amount than the amount of the levy certified to the county clerk. It was contended that these records so offered were a substantial compliance with section 124 of chapter 139 of Hurd\u2019s Statutes of 1901, and that they afforded a sufficient basis for the certificate made by the clerk of each town. This section directs the auditors to make a certificate of claims allowed, and to deliver the same to the\" town clerk, and that officer is required to certify the amount thereof to the county clerk, with other amounts, which are to be raised by taxation for town purposes. It will be observed from section 126ct of that chapter, that the board of auditors is required to keep a record, and the auditors in each of the towns concerned in this litigation complied with this requirement, and in each instance it was the record so kept that was offered in evidence. No certificate made as a basis for certifying a tax levy to the county clerk was offered. The legislature undoubtedly intended to require the making of a certificate by the auditors, in addition to their record, when the claims audited by them were intended by them to be the basis of a tax levy thereafter to be made.\nAppellant relies upon the case of St. Louis, Rock Island and Chicago Railroad Co. v. People ex rel. 147 Ill. 9. But in that case, in addition to the minutes of their meeting, the auditors wrote in their record, which was left with the town clerk, a certificate setting forth the amount of money which they needed to pay certain town charges, and the town clerk made his certificate of l\u00e9vy accordingly. The fact that the certificate was written in the record was no objection to it, where it was delivered to the clerk antf clearly showed that it was intended to authorize a certificate of levy. In the ca'se at bar no such certificates are found in the records of the auditors, and those records were therefore properly excluded by the court.\nThe judgment of the county court will be affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.", "type": "majority", "author": "Mr. Justice Scott" } ], "attorneys": [ "R. S. McIlduff, and Stevens R. Baker, for appellant.", "A. C. Norton, (Cary & Walker, of counsel,) for appellee." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "The People ex rel. Will L. Talbott, County Collector, v. The Indiana, Illinois and Iowa Railroad Company.\nOpinion filed December 16, 1903\nRehearing denied February 4, 1904\n1. Taxes\u2014what not a sufficient designation of town tax. Designation of a town tax in the record of the annual town meeting and in the town clerk\u2019s certificate of levy as a tax \u201cfor town purposes,\u201d is not sufficient to sustain such tax when objected to on application for judgment of sale.\n2. Same\u2014when the record of town auditors is not admissible to sustain town tax. The record of the board of town auditors showing the claims audited at\"its meeting is not admissible to sustain a town tax designated in the record of the town meeting and in the town clerk\u2019s certificate as a tax \u201cfor town purposes,\u201d where there is no certificate by the board of auditors showing the claims allowed. (St. Louis, Rock Island and Chicago Railroad Co. v. People, 147 Ill. 9, distinguished.)\nAppeal from the County Court of Livingston county; the Eon. F. E. Carrithers, Judge, presiding.\nR. S. McIlduff, and Stevens R. Baker, for appellant.\nA. C. Norton, (Cary & Walker, of counsel,) for appellee." }, "file_name": "0612-01", "first_page_order": 612, "last_page_order": 614 }