|Court of Appeals of Kentucky.|
|CITY OF PINEVILLE v. CREECH.|
|June 14, 1894.|
Appeal from circuit court, Bell county.
"Not to be officially reported."
Action by the city of Pineville against R. W. Creech.
Plaintiff appeals from a judgment for defendant.
Property 1 1/4 miles from a city, on the opposite side of a river and a high mountain, though within the city limits, is not liable for a city tax, from which the owner receives no further benefit than the inhabitants of the county in which the city is located.
In the year 1891 the authorities of the city of Pineville levied a tax of 50 cents on each $100 worth of property within its corporate boundary, and also a tax to pay a bonded debt for the construction of streets. The regularity of the tax is not questioned, nor the right of the city to enforce it, as against those who are within the corporate limits, and receive benefits from the corporation. The appellee in this case, being within the corporate boundary, is resisting the payment of the tax on the ground that he receives no benefits from the corporation, to a greater extent, at least, than those who live within the county in which the city of Pineville is located. This appellee resides in a small town called Wasiota, in which there is an hotel, telegraph office, post office, and express office, and perhaps a store. His property consists of a small dwelling. There is no street in the town, unless the narrow dirt road passing through it can be called one. The little town is on the Louisville & Nashville Railroad, and near the Cumberland river. It is about 1 1/4 miles from the city of Pineville; that city being on one side of the river, and Wasiota on the other. Between the two places rises Pine mountain, about 1,200 feet high. In order to reach the city, the inhabitants of Wasiota travel over a dirtroad to the river, then cross the bridge built by the county, and, when over the bridge, travel the dirt road to the city. This road is kept in order by the county, and no improvement has been made upon it by the city of Pineville since it was taken into the corporate limits by legislative authority. There seems to have included within the extended boundary many acres of wild, uncultivated land; and it could never have been contemplated that all this territory, including Wasiota, should bear a part of the burden for municipal improvements within the city of Pineville. It derives no benefit from the streets, its electric lights, and its convenience to places of public worship, and in fact derives no benefits such as would justify taxation required for city purposes. The extension may be necessary for the exercise of the police power of the city, but nothing more; and to hold this property liable for the tax imposed would be to sanction the imposition of a burden, from which the owner of the property can receive no compensation whatever. It is an extension of territory merely for purposes of revenue, with no benefit resulting to the party taxed, from the city government. This is clearly an abuse of the taxing power, and the fact the appellee purchased this property after the extension of the city boundary, and with a knowledge of that fact, does not affect the question.
The judgment enjoining the collection of the tax is affirmed.
CITY OF PINEVILLE v. CREECH.
Last Update Tuesday, 18-Dec-2012 01:37:10 EST
Copyright © 2015 by the KYGenWeb Team. All
rights reserved. Copyright of submitted items
belongs to those responsible for their authorship or
creation unless otherwise assigned.