Chamberlain v. City of St. Ignace

• Decision Date: 17 June 1892
• Citation: 52 N.W. 634,92 Mich. 332
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Parties: CHAMBERLAIN v. CITY OF ST. IGNACE.

52 N.W. 634

92 Mich. 332

CHAMBERLAIN v. CITY OF ST. IGNACE.

Supreme Court of Michigan

June 17, 1892

Error to circuit court, Mackinac county; C.J. PAILTHORP, Judge.

Action by Eli B. Chamberlain against the city of St. Ignace to recover illegal taxes. Plaintiff had judgment, and defendant brings error. Reversed.

James McNamara, for appellant.

James J. Brown, Watts S. Humphrey, and C. R Brown, for appellee.

MONTGOMERY J.

The plaintiff sues to recover the amount of the taxes assessed against him upon lands in the city of St. Ignace, in the year 1890, which were paid by him under protest. There is a special finding which shows that these taxes were levied in the year 1890, and that on the 16th day of February, 1891 the plaintiff paid the tax, delivering a written protest signed by him; and assigning, among other grounds of protest one stating that there was no equalization of the valuation of the real estate of said county by the board of supervisors during the year 1890. The record of the board of supervisors was introduced, showing an equalization in substantially the same form as that set out in Auditor General v. Roberts, 83 Mich. 471, 47 N.W. 442. In the present case all that appears is the following resolution: "Resolved, that the several townships and wards be, and the same are hereby, equalized by the board of supervisors as follows," (here follows the name of the township, and set opposite, and underneath the words "equalized at," the amount.) It does not appear by the findings that any sum was added to or deducted from the assessed valuation of any township or ward. The statute requires the board of supervisors to "examine the assessment rolls of the several townships, and ascertain whether the relative valuation of the real property in the respective townships has been equally and uniformly estimated. If, on such examination, they shall deem such valuation to be relatively unequal, they shall equalize the same by adding to or deducting from the valuation of the taxable property in any township or townships such an amount as in their judgment will produce relatively an equal and uniform valuation of the real property in the county, and the amount added to or deducted from the valuation in any township shall be entered upon the records. They shall also cause to be entered upon their records the aggregate valuation of the taxable real and personal property of each township of their county, as determined by them." Pub. Acts 1889, p. 238. The court below found the equalization invalid, and permitted a recovery for the entire tax paid, including state tax, county tax, and school tax, relying upon Auditor General v. Roberts, 83 Mich. 471, 47 N.W. 442. The school tax amounted to $31.34, and, in holding that this tax depended upon the regularity of the equalization of the board of supervisors, the court evidently relied upon the case of Auditor General v. Roberts. But in that case the local act under which the city of St. Ignace was organized is not referred to. That act, ^[1] in section 5, provides for a board of review for the city, who shall meet at the office of the city clerk in St. Ignace in August, and there review and correct the assessments made by the supervisors of the several wards. By section 7 it is...