PROTEST OF AMERICAN NAT'L BANK

Annotate this Case

PROTEST OF AMERICAN NAT'L BANK
1930 OK 228
287 P. 1043
143 Okla. 115
Case Number: 20161
Decided: 05/06/1930
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

PROTEST OF AMERICAN NAT. BANK OF ENID.

Syllabus

¶0 Taxation--Limitation on Jurisdiction of Court of Tax Review.
The Court of Tax Review has no jurisdiction to review the application of a legal rate of ad valorem tax levy to specific property, or to determine that specific property is subject thereto.

Appeal from Court of Tax Review; T. G. Chambers, Hal Johnson, and Harve L. Melton, Judges.

In the matter of the protest of the American National Bank of Enid against tax levies by the Excise Board of Garfield County. Protest dismissed, and protestant appeals. Affirmed.

H. E. Keim and McKeever, Moore & Elam, for appellant.

ANDREWS, J.

¶1 This is an appeal from the judgment of the Court of Tax Review dismissing the protest of the American National Bank of Enid, Okla., against the application of a legal rate of ad valorem tax levy fixed by the excise board of Garfield county, Okla., to the property of the protestant. The Court of Tax Review dismissed the protest on the ground that that court was without jurisdiction to determine the issue presented.

¶2 The protestant contends that the rate of levy fixed by the excise board of Garfield county for ad valorem tax purposes could not be lawfully applied to its property because the rate so fixed was excessive and in violation of section 5219, Rev. Stat. of the United States, as amended by the Act of March 4, 1923, and section 9607, C. O. S. 1921.

¶3 The issue presented was determined by this court in Protest of First Nat. Bank of Guthrie, 136 Okla. 141, 276 P. 766, wherein this court held that the Court of Tax Review has no jurisdiction to review the application of a legal rate of ad valorem tax levy to specific property or to determine whether or not specific property is subject thereto. That decision is controlling.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.