Grimes v. City of Burlington

• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
• Writing for the Court: BECK
• Citation: 37 N.W. 106,74 Iowa 123
• Decision Date: 09 March 1888
• Parties: GRIMES v. CITY OF BURLINGTON.

74 Iowa 123
37 N.W. 106

GRIMES
v.
CITY OF BURLINGTON.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

March 9, 1888.

Appeal from circuit court, Morris county; CHARLES H. PHELPS, Judge.

This is a proceeding instituted by plaintiff, David W. Grimes, to correct the assessment made upon his personal property for taxation. There was a decision upon an appeal to the circuit court adverse to him. He now appeals to this court.

[37 N.W. 106]

P. Henry Smyth, for appellant.

John J. Surley, for appellee.

BECK, J.

1. The city council of the city of Burlington, wherein plaintiff resided and was a tax-payer, acting under the statute as a board for the equalization of taxes, added to plaintiff's assessment $10,000 upon moneys and credits alleged to be held by him, and which the assessor failed to assess. There was no evidence introduced before the board of equalization other than the assessment and an affidavit of plaintiff denying that he was subject to assessment for moneys and credits. These papers were before the board, and we presume they were regarded as in evidence. The plaintiff, as authorized by statute, (Code, § 831,) appealed to the circuit court. Upon the trial in the circuit court the defendant offered to introduce evidence to show that plaintiff was subject to assessment upon $10,000 of money and credits, to which plaintiff objected, insisting that no evidence could be admitted on the appeal, and that it must be tried upon the record of the proceedings of the board of equalization. The objection was overruled, and the court held that the evidence was admissible. After this ruling the plaintiff, in the language of the abstract, “to save time and delay, conceded that he had property at the time sufficient to justify the assessment.” Thereupon the circuit court affirmed the action of the board of equalization.

2. The sole question presented by the record before us is this: Upon an appeal from the action of the board of equalization, is the case to be decided upon the record of its proceedings alone, or may evidence be introduced by the parties in addition to the matters shown by such record? The statute authorizing the appeal from the board of equalization does not prescribe the proceedings or manner of the trial of the appeal. It simply declares that the assessment shall be corrected “in such manner as to said board may seem just and equitable.” Upon the appeal the case must be tried upon facts presented to the court. The case may be determined by the board of equalization...