State ex rel. Flambeau Paper Co. v. Windus

• Decision Date: 20 June 1932
• Citation: 243 N.W. 216,208 Wis. 583
• Parties: STATE EX REL. FLAMBEAU PAPER CO. v. WINDUS, CITY CLERK.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

208 Wis. 583

243 N.W. 216

STATE EX REL. FLAMBEAU PAPER CO.

v.WINDUS, CITY CLERK.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

June 20, 1932.

Appeal from a judgment of the Circuit Court for Price County; G. N. Risjord, Circuit Judge.

Certiorari by the State, on the relation of the Flambeau Paper Company, against William Windus, City Clerk of the City of Park Falls. From a judgment sustaining the assessment, and the action of the Board of Review of the city of Park Falls in refusing to reduce the assessment, plaintiff appeals.--[By Editorial Staff.]

Affirmed.

Certiorari to review the action of the board of review of the city of Park Falls refusing to reduce the assessment of plaintiff's property. The proceeding was commenced January 20, 1930. From a judgment sustaining the assessment, entered November 27, 1931, the plaintiff appeals.

The assessor assessed the land of plaintiff at $58,000, and the improvements thereon at $1,010,000. The plaintiff claimed before the board of review that this was excessive, and offered evidence to support its claim. The assessment of the land is accepted as correct. Plaintiff's witnesses fixed the sale value of the improvements at amounts varying from $600,000 to $785,000. The witnesses produced in behalf of the city fixed the sale value at from $1,100,000 to $1,130,000. The board of review left the assessment as made by the assessor.

In addition to the testimony of witnesses, the city introduced in evidence a prospectus gotten out by plaintiff in 1927 to aid in the sale of mortgage bonds of the company to the amount of $1,000,000, and the only property owned by the company not included in the land and improvements involved in the assessment attacked is of the assessed value of about $27,000. An officer of the plaintiff company testified that this prospectus was essentially correct in its statement of facts, and that there was no considerable change in the property between the time the prospectus was prepared and the assessment was made. An affidavit of the president of the company filed with the Railroad Commission in support of its application for permission to sell these bonds gives the sound value of the property, as fixed by an appraisal the company procured made, at $2,319,448. Another appraisal made in behalf of the company gives its sound value as $1,661,261. The property is insured against fire for $1,050,000, which includes raw material on hand, pulp and finished paper, but does not cover developed water powers, which are an important item of plaintiff's property. The sound book value of the improvements, consisting of paper mill, sulphite mill, pulp mill, and machine shop, according to the company's set-up made up of cost less depreciation is $1,100,239.65.

Bundy, Beach & Holland, of Eau Claire (Miller, Mack & Fairchild, of Milwaukee, of counsel), for appellant.

C. E. Lovett, of Park Falls, for respondent.

FOWLER, J.

The parties agree that the only point in this case is whether, assuming the plaintiff's witnesses to have been competent to testify, there was any competent evidence offered on the part of the city to contradict the valuation set by them.

[1]Section 70.32, Stats. provides that real estate shall be assessed at “the full value which could ordinarily be obtained therefor at private sale.” While the sale value is the point to which the evidence must be addressed, the board of review was not confined solely to the testimony of the witnesses in arriving at its determination. The prospectus, book value, appraisals procured by the plaintiff, and the amount of insurance carried might properly be considered by the board of review. It was recently held by this court that the book value set up by the owner and the price at which he listed the property for sale might be considered in fixing an assessment. Worthington Pump Corp. v. City of Cudahy (Wis.) 237 N. W. 140. Upon like reason the matters above stated were properly for consideration. They were in the nature of admissions by the plaintiff of the sound value of the property assessed, and sound value is an element to be considered in determining what property will sell for at private sale, especially in the case of large industrial plants which from their magnitude and nature cannot have a market value in any strict or real sense.

[2] But aside from this we are of opinion that the witnesses who were sworn by the city were eminently qualified to testify. To state their qualifications in detail would unreasonably extend this opinion. One of them was Mr. Hartt, a consulting engineer of Madison. Five pages of respondent's brief are devoted to stating his experiences in appraisals of industrial plants, utilities, water powers, pulp and paper mills, and paper manufacturing plants. He knew of the sales of paper mill properties made in recent years in Wisconsin, although having no...