Highlander Co. v. City of Dodgeville
| Decision Date | 22 January 1947 |
| Citation | 249 Wis. 502,25 N.W.2d 76 |
| Parties | HIGHLANDER CO. v. CITY OF DODGEVILLE (two cases). |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from two judgments in the County Court for Iowa County; F. E. Olson, Acting County Judge.
Affirmed.
Actions by the Highlander Company, a Wisconsin Corporation, commenced on October 27, 1945 and March 23, 1946, respectively, against The City of Dodgeville, for the recovery of taxes alleged to have been levied upon excessive valuation in the years 1944 and 1945. The action was under sec. 74.73, Stats. Defendant demurred to the complaint (1) on the grounds that there is a defect of parties plaintiff, because the present plaintiff was not the owner of the property at the time of the assessment, or the meeting of the board of review in the year 1944; (2) that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action; (3) other grounds of demurrer upon which there is no issue on this appeal.
On July 5, 1946 the trial court entered an order sustaining the demurrer upon both grounds and judgments were entered on the same date dismissing plaintiff's complaint. Boardman, Jones & Hamilton, of Dodgeville, for appellant.
Charlton H. James, of Dodgeville, for respondent.
Two actions are involved on this appeal, but with one exception the same contentions are applicable to each action. One action relates to the taxes of 1944 and the other to those of 1945. The complaint alleges that on May 1, 1944 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation owned certain described real estate in the City of Dodgeville, and that on that date the real estate was assessed for taxation in the sum of $56,500 whereas its value at private sale was not over $19,500.
It is further alleged that ‘on the 22nd day of August, 1944, the plaintiff, the Highlander Company, purchased the above described real estate from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation for the sum of $19500.00; that said sale was made pursuant to a public sale held before the U. S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin at Madison, Wisconsin on the 22nd day of August, 1944; that conveyance, pursuant to said order of the Court and public sale, was made to the plaintiff on the 28th day of August, 1944, and since said time the plaintiff has been the owner of the title in fee simple of said premises.’
It is alleged that an appearance was made before the Board of Review and a full disclosure concerning the value of the property made but that the board disregarded the evidence and confirmed the assessment; that the tax was levied on this assessment and paid by defendant; that on May 1, 1945 plaintiff filed its claim for refund with the city clerk; that on May 1, 1945 this claim was wholly disallowed.
The second complaint is identical with the first, except that it appears that the real estate was assessed in 1945 at the sum of $47,500. Demand is made in the first complaint for the sum of $1024.28 and in the second complaint for $824.04 alleged to constitute the taxes based upon the excessive assessment.
Sec. 74.73(1), Stats., which is the subsection under which this proceeding is brought, provides as follows:
Subsection (2) of the same section provides in part: ‘(2) * * * no action shall be maintained under the provisions of this section unless it shall appear that the plaintiff has paid more than his equitable share of such taxes.’
Plaintiff contends that its complaint states a cause of action under sec. 74.73, Stats., to recover taxes unlawfully assessed. Defendant contends that plaintiff's complaint merely alleges an excessive assessment, and that sec. 74.73, Stats., has no application whatever to excessive assessments; that it relates to matters going to the groundwork of the tax and constituting serious jurisdictional defects. Other contentions are made by both defendant and plaintiff, but since a resolution of the foregoing issue largely decides this case, we shall immediately address ourselves to this issue.
In Krom v. Antigo, 220 Wis. 542, 265 N.W. 716, 718, this court declined a recovery under sec. 74.73, Stats., and said: ‘If a taxpayer can attack the validity of a tax levied upon his real property upon the ground that it is overvalued by the assessor and upon that basis recover the excess, every assessment of real estate would be open to attack, and the tax would never be valid unless the valuation fixed by the assessor was as low or lower than that fixed by the reviewing court.’
It was further stated that unless facts are established which show that the tax is unjust and unfair as applied to the taxpayer seeking recovery, there can be no recovery.
Upon the basis of this, plaintiff claims that a taxpayer may attack the validity of a tax imposed upon his real property because it is overvalued by the assessor, provided he can also show that the tax is inequitable as applied to him, and that he is required to pay more than his just and fair share of the taxes. It is contended that while the complaint makes no specific allegation of the inequity of plaintiff's burden, it does state that property, the proper value of which was $19,500 was assessed at $55,500, and that liberally construed that amounts to a statement that plaintiff's assessment is out of line with other assessments in the same town and imposes upon it an unfair and inequitable burden. We shall discuss this contention in a later portion of the opinion.
Defendant relies upon statements in the Krom case, supra, intimating that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McManus v. Town of Dunn
...that under sec. 74.73, Stats., McManus needed to prove both that the assessment was excessive and, as held in Highlander Co. v. Dodgeville, 249 Wis. 502, 509, N.W.2d 76, 80 (1946), it was 'so out of line with the valuation of other property in the same locality as to impose an inequitable b......
-
Yawkey-Bissell Corp. v. Town of Langlade, YAWKEY-BISSELL
...cut-over lands, including those of the plaintiff, had been radically over assessed in 1948. As stated in Highlander Co. v. City of Dodgeville, 249 Wis. 502, 507, 508, 25 N.W.2d 76, 79: 'Sec. 70.32, Stats., requires that all property be assessed at 'the full value which could ordinarily be o......
-
Barker Lumber Co. v. Village of Genoa City
...has failed to comply with the requisite steps to come within it. It is our opinion that the rule stated in Highlander Co. v. Dodgeville, 1946, 249 Wis. 502, 509, 25 N.W.2d 76, 80, controls. In that case an action was brought under section 74.73 for the recovery of taxes levied upon an alleg......
-
Pelican Amusement Co. v. Town of Pelican
...We do not consider Barker Lumber Co. v. Village of Genoa City, 1956, 273 Wis. 466, 78 N.W.2d 893 or the Highlander Co. v. City of Dodgeville, 1946, 249 Wis. 502, 25 N.W.2d 76, in conflict with this interpretation. The Barker case involved an illegal tax not based upon an excessive valuation......