City of Milwaukee v. Milwaukee Cnty.

• Decision Date: 12 January 1897
• Citation: 69 N.W. 819,95 Wis. 424
• Parties: CITY OF MILWAUKEE v. MILWAUKEE COUNTY ET AL.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

95 Wis. 424

69 N.W. 819

CITY OF MILWAUKEE

v.MILWAUKEE COUNTY ET AL.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Jan. 12, 1897.

Appeal from circuit court, Milwaukee county; D. H. Johnson, Judge.

Action by the city of Milwaukee against Milwaukee county and George W. Mayhew, county treasurer, to enjoin the sale of property for taxes. From an order denying a motion to dissolve a temporary injunction, defendants appeal. Reversed.

This is an action in equity, brought by the city of Milwaukee against the county of Milwaukee and the county treasurer, for the cancellation of county, school, and state taxes levied upon certain lands in the town of Wauwatosa, but occupied by the city for park purposes. The legal title to the lands in question at the time of the levying of said taxes was in William H. Perrigo and others, but the city was in possession thereof under certain contracts, dated October 13, 1891. The terms of the contracts are quite fully set forth in the opinion written by the present chief justice in the case of Perrigo v. City of Milwaukee, 92 Wis. 236, 65 N. W. 1025, as follows: “By the terms of the agreement, the city, upon making the first payment, was entitled to the possession of the premises, with the right to alter, change, and improve the same, to be used as a public park, pursuant to chapter 488, Laws 1889, and chapter 179, Laws 1891; but it had no right to a conveyance of the legal title thereof until it had, within the 10 years mentioned, paid the balance of the purchase price,--$46,487.94,--with the interest thereon, payable annually, and all taxes assessed on the premises after January 1, 1891. For any failure of the city to make any payment of purchase money or annual interest or taxes at the times and in the manner specified, the Perrigos, their heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, were thereby expressly authorized, by action or proceedings at law or in equity, to bar and foreclose all right and equity of redemption of the city in the premises. But each of the legislative enactments mentioned expressly provides that such purchase or agreement to purchase should be ‘without creating any corporate liabilities therefor’; and the agreement expressly provides that the same should ‘not create any corporate liability against’ the city ‘in any manner or form,’ and that the Perrigos would ‘not claim any corporate liability against’ the city ‘by reason thereof.’ ” In that case it appeared that the city had attempted to tax Perrigo's interest in one of the contracts as personal property, he being a resident of the city, and it was held not taxable as personal property, because it created no debt, and was a mere...