REVISED CODES. § 2815. Amended by Laws $$2498, 2501, 2741.. 53 4051. 626 286 $$ 4401--4411. .1093 4420. $$ 5466, 5492, § 6422. 463 § 4740, subsec. 4. 873 7274759. 478 14(1) (Cal.App.) Failure to comply with a 14(12) (Cal.) Where it was stipulated_that other judgment according to stipulation, by 21 (Wyo.) Evidence held to show that stip- STOCK. See Building and Loan Associations, 14, STOCKHOLDERS. 14(12) (Cal.App.) Judgment creditor held STREET RAILROADS. See Carriers, 295. II. REGULATION AND OPERATION. 85(1) (Cal.) As between street cars and other vehicles or persons on public streets, neither party has superior right, and neither is bound to exercise higher degree of care.-Tower v. Humboldt Transit Co., 169 P. 227. 93(%) (Cal.) Where plaintiff fainted on street railway's track, so that she was run over, railway was not liable unless failure to avoid striking her was due to want of care on part of railway or servants.-Tower v. Humboldt Transit Co., 169 P. 227. 99(7) (Utah) One who speculates on the question of time of getting across a street car track with an automobile in front of a street car cannot recover damages occasioned by a collision.-Goan v. Ogden, L. & I. Ry. Co., 169 P. 949. clusion of general creditor.-Derby v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 169 P. 500. 23(1) (Or.) There was no privity of contract between bank lending money to contractor with state to install plumbing and state as there was between contractor's surety and state.Derby v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 169 P. 500. 23 (6) (Okl.) Money paid by third person to grantor at grantee's request is generally considered purchase money as against grantee's homestead right, and the payment entitles third party to subrogation to grantor's rights as to vendor's lien.-Zehr v. May, 169 P. 1077. 31 (4) (Kan.) A surety satisfying a judg ment against his principal and filing with the clerk notice of intention to claim repayment under Civ. Code, § 474 (Gen. St. 1915, § 7378), has all remedies of an owner of a judgment in enforcing repayment.-Kinkel v. Chase, 169 P. SUBSCRIPTIONS. 1134. 112(2) (Cal.) Doctrine of res ipsa loquitur has no application to case of collision between street car and pedestrian. Presumption of neg- See Corporations, 76, 90. ligence arises only where occurrence ordinarily does not happen without negligence.-Tower v. Humboldt Transit Co., 169 P. 227. See Parties, 58. 13(1) (Cal.) Where street railway contended plaintiff attempted to bring injuries on herself, the court should have been liberal in allowing proof of her conduct following depart- See Action. ure from home on day of accident.-Tower v. Humboldt Transit Co., 169 P. 227. SUBSTITUTION. SUIT. SUMMARY PROCEEDINGS. 113(3) (Cal.) In action for injuries when See Taxation, 597. street car struck surrey in which plaintiff was riding, testimony of those who operated the brakes showing the condition of the brakes before and after the accident was admissible.Grossetti v. Sweasey, 169 P. 687. See Process. SUMMONS. SUPERSEDEAS. 114(5) (Cal.) Evidence held to sustain finding of negligence of motorman in charge of car which struck surrey, injuring plaintiff.-Grosset- See Appeal and Error, 492. ti v. Sweasey, 169 P. 687. 114(14) (Utah) Evidence held to support a SURETY. finding that an automobile driver could have See Principal and Surety. on SURGEONS. 118(1) (Cal.) In action for injuries to girl See Physicians and Surgeons. street railway's tracks, instruction held erroneous as so framed that jury must have SUSPENSION. understood plaintiff was not bound to prove See Attorney and Client, 44. 119 (Utah) A finding by the court that at SWINDLING. the time of discovery of plaintiff on the track See False Pretenses. TAILENDERS. showed that the court considered the last clear See Sales, 68. STREETS. See Municipal Corporations, 657-706. STRIKES. See Constitutional Law, 83; Injunction, 118. SUBLETTING. See Landlord and Tenant, 209. SUBMISSION. See Schools and School Districts, 97. SUBROGATION. TAXATION. See Constitutional Law, 283; Drains, 67; Highways, 130; Licenses; Mandamus, 117; Municipal Corporations, 434-519; Schools and School Districts, 111. II. CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIRE- 38 (Cal.) St. 1911, p. 1290, as amended by St. 1911 (Ex. Sess.) p. 92, delegating to board of directors of water district which the people of several municipalities of a county may organize power to tax, does not contravene Const. art. 11, § 12, prohibiting Legislature from_taxing counties or cities for their purposes.-Henshaw v. Foster, 169 P. 82. 7(1) (Or.) On account of right of surety of 44 (Mont.) Laws 1917, c. 167, requiring ancontractor with state to install plumbing to per- nual levy of tax for high school building bonds form on contractor's default, when it did so it only on property outside limits of districts was entitled to benefits to contractor under wherein a district high school is maintained, is contract, and to be subrogated to all rights of invalid as in violation of Const. art. 12. § 11, ton v. Board of County Com'rs of Fergus Coun--State v. Superior Court of Whatcom County, ty, 169 P. 729. 169 P. 22. III. LIABILITY OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY. (A) Private Persons and Property in Gen eral. 63 (Mont.) Any mineral deposit yielding proceeds, wherever found, and regardless of from whom purchased, is a mine within Const. art. 12, 83, providing for taxing all mines.Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. Musselshell County, (C) Mode of Assessment in General. 333 (Cal.) Conceding that money awarded plaintiff in condemnation proceedings, and which was on deposit with county treasurer, constituted "solvent credit," from which debts owing by plaintiff could be deducted, plaintiff was not entitled to deduction unless amount of such debts were shown by sworn statement, as required by Pol. Code, § 3629, subd. 6.-Bessolo v. City of Los Angeles, 169 P. 372. 169 P. 53. Under Const. art. 12, § 3, providing for taxa-338 (Okl.) Real estate should be assessed tion of mines, and that "the annual net proceeds in the name of the legal owner, regardless of of all mines and mining claims shall be taxed," mortgage liens.-In re Inglis, 169 P. 1083. the expression "all mines" applies to all min-347 (Mont.) Difficulty which may confront eral deposits, and puts them in the category of assessor in ascertaining value of property for personalty, so that they are taxable only when taxation can be no bar to taxing such property. capable of yielding proceeds.--Id. -Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. Musselshell County, 169 P. 53. Under Const. art. 12, § 3, providing for taxing mines, all mineral deposits, whether pur-348 (Mont.) In determining value of reserchased from the United States or not, are to vation, cash value of land, less mineral deposit, be taxed as mines.-Id. 80 (Mont.) Where railroad owning coal lands sold them, reserving all minerals together with right to use surface for exploring and mining minerals, while mineral deposit was not, under Const. art. 12, § 3, as to taxing mines, taxable until developed to yield proceeds, reservation in deed of right to use surface was interest in the land, subject to tax under Const. art. 12, § 17, and Rev. Codes, §§ 2498, 2501, defining property.-Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. Musselshell County, 169 P. 53. 87 (Cal.) Where sum awarded plaintiff in condemnation proceedings was in hands of county treasurer on first Monday of March, it was assessable against treasurer in view of Pol. Code, § 3647.-Bessolo v. City of Los Angeles, 169 P. 372. (B) Corporations and Corporate Stock and Property. 117 (Mont.) Under Const. art. 12, §§ 1, 7, 16, 17, stating when property is taxable, a franchise granted by the state is subject to taxation.-Wells Fargo & Co. v. Harrington, 169 P. 463; American Express Co. v. Same, Id. 466. The Constitution, in using the term "franchise," refers to something having a practical money value, and out of which the tax may be realized by forced sale, if necessary.-Id. 142 (Mont.) In view of Const. art. 12, §§ 1, 7, 16, 17, and Laws 1891, p. 83, §§ 26, 27, 29, franchise of express company held not taxable. -Wells Fargo & Co. v. Harrington, 169 P. 463; American Express Co. v. Same, Id. 466. 165 (Mont.) Since Rev. Codes, § 4420, merely authorizes foreign corporations coming into the state to exercise power of eminent domain in such cases as domestic corporations could exercise it, and as an express company is nowhere authorized to invoke the power of eminent domain, a foreign express company does not have a special privilege taxable as a franchise.Wells Fargo & Co. v. Harrington, 169 P. 463; American Express Co. v. Same, Id. 466. V. LEVY AND ASSESSMENT. (A) Levy and Apportionment. 297 (Okl.) Prior to Laws 1917, c. 226, county excise board could not increase any estimate certified by county commissioners, and taxes levied according to increased estimates were void to the extent of such excess over estimates certified.-Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Eldredge, 169 P. 1071. (B) Assessors and Proceedings for As sessment. 319(2) (Wash.) There is presumption that assessing officers of county did duty in respect to assessment, equalization, and levy of taxes. is to be ascertained as if entire estate was vested in grantee, and equitable apportionment made by assessor between grantee and the reserving grantor.-Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. Musselshell County, 169 P. 53. Under Const. art. 12, § 3, all mines are to be taxed, on annual net proceeds, without regard to source of title or whether the operator has title, and on their surface, if bought from the United States, at the price paid therefor, unless the surface is used and has value for purposes other than mining, and if not bought from the United States, at the value of the surface, regardless of minerals.-Id. 348 (Utah) Const. art. 13, §§ 2-4, and Comp. Laws 1907, §§ 2504, 2506, requiring coal lands secured from United States to be assessed at purchase price and other coal lands at actual value, prohibits blanket assessment of all coal lands in county at flat rate.-Ririe v. Randolph, 169 P. 941. 355 (Cal.) Where sum awarded plaintiff in condemnation proceedings was in hands of county treasurer on first Monday of March, plaintiff was not, under sections 3628, 3629, subd. 6, 3650, subd. 15, entitled to deduction of unsecured debts owing by him.-Bessolo v. City of Los Angeles, 169 P. 372. 355 (Okl.) Real estate should be assessed at its fair cash value, without any deduction in assessed valuation because of mortgage liens.In re Inglis, 169 P. 1083. 363 (Okl.) Taxpayer whose objections to increased valuation by county tax assessor were determined by board of equalization could not complain because assessor did not furnish copy of schedule showing raise in valuation as required by Rev. Laws 1910, § 7324, where taxpayer had made copies of valuation before determination.-In re Inglis, 169 P. 1083. (F) Equalization of Assessments. 450(3) (Idaho) Under Laws 1913, c. 58, §. 92, as amended by Laws 1915, c. 18, when state board of equalization has determined number of miles of electric current transmission lines in a certain county and the value thereof and of the operating property, its judicial function with respect thereto terminates. Kootenai County v. State Board of Equalization of State of Idaho, 169 P. 935. (G) Review, Correction, or Setting Aside of Assessment. 493(5) (Okl.) Where taxpayer appeals to district court from board of equalization on valuation of property, and appeals from judgment, objections to testimony received by board cannot be considered, exceptions preserved in trial before district court alone being presented. In re Inglis, 169 P. 1083. 493(7) (Or.) On an appeal to the circuit court from the refusal of the board of equalization to reduce an assessment, evidence held insufficient to show error on the part of the assessor in valuing the lots.-Douglas Land Co. v. Clatsop County, 169 P. 790. Party appearing to circuit court from board of equalization under L. O. L. § 3613, as amended by Laws 1913, p. 329, held to have burden of showing error on part of assessor. -Id. Offers to sell property at stated prices held not admissible on behalf of party making them on appeal from refusal by board of equalization to reduce assessment.-Id. 493(8) (Or.) On appeal from the refusal of the board of equalization to reduce an assessment under L. O. L. § 3613, as amended by Laws 1913, p. 329, an issue as to the illegality of the assessment cannot be determined.Douglas Land Co. v. Clatsop County, 169 P. 790. VII. PAYMENT AND REFUNDING OR RECOVERY OF TAX PAID. VIII. COLLECTION AND ENFORCE- (B) Summary Remedies and Actions. IX. SALE OF LAND FOR NONPAY- ་ to thereon, sufficiently provides for interest between date of judgment and date of sale.-Id. 659 (Cal.) Under Pol. Code, § 3897, as to notice of tax sale, and section 3650, as assessment roll, evidence establishing a residence of the last-assessed owner, apart from knowledge officially chargeable upon the tax collector, will not be permitted to establish illegal failure to mail the notice.-Crouch v. Shafer, 169 P. 1019. Under Pol. Code, §§ 3897, 3650, as to notice of tax sale and assessment roll, the tax collector is not required to resort to any other source of information to learn the address of the least-assessed owner than that given by the assessment book.-Id. 661 (Cal.) Under Pol. Code, § 3897, requiring published or posted notice of tax sale, the notice is required to be kept conspicuously posted upon the land only when the method of notice by posting is adopted.-Crouch v. Shafer, 169 P. 1019. X. REDEMPTION FROM TAX SALE. 699 (N.M.) Counties purchasing tax-sale certificates are purchasing within Laws 1899, c. 22, § 23, hence owner can only redeem by paying to the collector the amount of purchase money with specified costs and interest within three years.-Knight v. Fairless, 169 P. 312. 701 (Okl.) The notice to owner of amount of taxes due provided by Laws 1910, c. 73, § 2, as amended by Laws 1910-11, c. 120, § 1, determines delinquency of taxes.-Williams v. MeGill, 169 P. 1074. XI. TAX TITLES. (A) Title and Rights of Purchaser at Tax Sale. 734 (4) (N.M.) Where property is assessed in name of one not the owner by a correct description, and tax deed is issued therefor. rightful owner cannot defeat sale in violation of Laws 1899, c. 22, § 25, by evidence that owner returned property under blanket assessment givas to property listed.ing no intimation Knight v. Fairless, 169 P. 312. 734 (9) (Cal.) Under Pol. Code, §§ 3897, 3650, 3651, as to notice of tax sale and assessment roll and index, where address of lastassessed owner on assessment roll stated no city or town of residence, tax collector's failure to mail registered notice of tax sale did not invalidate a tax deed.-Crouch v. Shafer, (B Tax Deeds. 647 (Wash.) Where forms provided by county for judgments in tax foreclosure cases used singular in describing certificate of delinquency, if more than one certificate was being foreclosed, 169 P. 1019. as in three cases, singular could be changed to plural, so that judgment would accurately de-752 (Mont.) Where grantor reserved minscribe certificates.-State v. Superior Court of erals and right to use surface in mining, but Whatcom County, 169 P. 22. If listing of property for taxation and assess- had not developed the mine, so that the tax on ment, equalization, and levy of taxes thereon the mine was illegal, and the amount due on the were duly and regularly done, such facts, if surface reservation was not assessed or deterproven, are proper to be inserted in judgment in mined, the grantor could have injunction restraining issuance of deed to purchaser of mintax foreclosure case.-Id. eral rights at tax sale, under Rev. Codes, § 2741, though he had not paid the amount due on the surface reservation.-Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. Musselshell County, 169 P. 53. There is presumption that assessing officers of county did duty, and that assessment, equalization, and levy of taxes were regularly made, so that omission of such facts from judgment in tax foreclosure case is not improper.-Id. Judgment in tax foreclosure case which does not recite that claims of defendants are inferior to plaintiff's lien, and contains no adjudication barring their claims, is proper, since it necessarily makes defendants' claims inferior to rights of plaintiff in foreclosure.-Id. It is probably proper to recite in judgment in tax foreclosure case name of person to whom property was assessed, and in whose name certificates of delinquency were issued.-Id. Judgment in tax foreclosure action need contain no adjudication that plaintiff's lien is subject to lien of local improvement assessments of city.-Id. 773 (Cal.) Where recitals in tax deed to the state are sufficient, they are conclusive.Crouch v. Shafer, 169 P. 1019. XII. FORFEITURES AND PENALTIES, 840 (Okl.) Where notice of amount of taxes due provided by Laws 1910, c. 73, § 2, as amended by Laws 1910-11, c. 120, § 1, has not been given a tax deed, including penalty for delinquency with the taxes due, is unauthorized. -Williams v. McGill, 169 P. 1074. XIII. LEGACY, INHERITANCE, AND Judgment in tax foreclosure case providing 861 (Cal.) Where deceased had made an for sale of property sufficient to satisfy judgment, with interest, costs, and accruing costs irrevocable transfer of corporation stock, the transferee agreeing to pay him the dividends un |