State ex rel. Fensell v. Aldridge
State ex rel. Fensell v. Aldridge
Opinion of the Court
The statute which governs the apportionment of the value of the rolling stock of a railroad among the several counties for purposes of taxation is section 2774, Revised Statutes. That section is as follows:
“Section 2774. The value of such property, moneys and credits, of any railroad company, as found and determined by such board, shall be apportioned by said board among the several counties through which such road, or any part thereof, runs, so that to each county and to each city, village, township and district, or part thereof therein, shall be apportioned such part thereof as shall equalize the relative value of the real estate, structures, and stationary personal property of such company therein, in proportion to the whole value of the real estate, structures, and stationary personal property of such railroad company in this state; and so that the rolling stock, main track, roadbed, supplies, moneys and credits of such company shall be apportioned in the same proportion that the length of snch road in such county bears t@
It is conceded on all hands, and found by the master as a fact, that the railroad in question has a main line, a river division and a Tuscarawas branch, and that part of its rolling stock-is used solely upon the main line, part on the river division and part on the Tuscarawas branch, and the remainder of the rolling stock is used indiscriminately upon the whole road including the division and branch.
A division or branch cannot separately own any part of the rolling stock, because all the rolling stock is owned by the company; but it often occurs that a branch or division is constructed, equipped and financed by itself, and separate books and accounts kept of the earnings, running expenses, equipage, interest, bonds, etc., and in such cases the rolling stock, while owned by the company, is regarded as belonging- to such branch or division for operating purposes, and in such cases its value is required by said section 2774, to be apportioned to the counties through, or into, which the track of such branch or division passes, according to the number of miles of track in each county.
If there is no such separate construction, equipage or accounts, but still certain parts of the rolling- stock
While it does not positively appear from the facts found by the master, that any injustice was done in the apportionment made by the board upon such percentage basis, it clearly appears that the apportionment was made upon a wrong and unlawful basis, and that in all probability injustice was done, as it is not likely that a correct result would arise from a wrong basis or method.
It is urged that the minutes of the meeting of the auditors is a record conclusive in its nature, and that proof cannot be received to show the real facts, as such proof would be contradicting the record. This claim is not tenable. In matters of taxation the real facts may be shown even though such facts add to or contradict the record of a taxing board. Lewis v. State ex rel., 59 Ohio St., 37; Hagerty v. Huddleston et al., 60 Ohio St., 149.
A writ of mandamus will therefore be awarded commanding the auditors of the several counties through, or into which said railroad passes, to reassemble and as a board apportion the valuation of seven thousand dollars per mile among said counties by the method and upon the basis, as required by said Sec. 2774 as above construed.
Writ of mandamus awarded.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.