State ex rel. Pierce v. Jodon

• Decision Date: 12 February 1924
• Citation: 197 N.W. 189,182 Wis. 645
• Parties: STATE EX REL. PIERCE v. JODON, TOWN CLERK.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

182 Wis. 645

197 N.W. 189

STATE EX REL. PIERCE

v.JODON, TOWN CLERK.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Feb. 12, 1924.

Appeal from Superior Court, Douglas County; W. R. Foley, Judge.

Certiorari by the State, on the relation of Henry Clay Pierce, against Thomas E. Jodon, as Town Clerk of the Town of Highland, to review assessment of board of review. From the judgment of the superior court, affirming the assessment in part and reducing it in part, relator appeals. Affirmed.

The appeal is from a judgment affirming on certiorari an assessment for the year 1922 against certain real and personal property of the plaintiff and appellant.

The appellant is the owner of certain property known as Cedar Island Lodge, located on the Brule river in Douglas county, Wis., the same being within the town of Highland. The property consists of 4,226 acres of land, some of it heavily covered with timber, together with numerous buildings, including a fish hatchery, a greenhouse with flower beds, a deer park with fence, and a bear cage. The property has private roads and paths, with bridges crossing the Brule river. Connected with the fish hatchery are a number of small lakes partially artificially constructed. Connected also with the property are various machines, automobiles, and boats. The land also seems to be fenced. The real estate, including the buildings and improvements, was assessed for the year 1922 at $82,300; the personal property was assessed at $5,000, and in addition thereto there was assessed $1,320 on account of lumber that was not included in the assessment of 1921.

The petitioner applied for a reduction of his assessment before the board of review, and a hearing was had by the board and evidence taken. The board of review affirmed the assessment, with the exception that it reduced the amount “on all other personal property” from $5,000 to $3,885, from which action the appellant had certiorari proceedings to the superior court. The superior court affirmed the assessment on the land and improvements, upheld the assessment on the lumber, and reduced the amount fixed by the board of review on all other personal property from $3,885 to $500, and entered judgment accordingly. From such judgment the plaintiff appeals.Hanitch, Hartley, McPherson & Johnson, of Superior, for appellant.

Archibald McKay, of Superior, for respondent.

CROWNHART, J. (after stating the facts as above).

[1][2][3][4] The principles of law are well settled governing the jurisdiction of courts in reviewing the findings of boards of review on certiorari. The duties of boards of review are quasi judicial, and courts have no jurisdiction to disturb their findings or determinations, except where they act in bad faith or exceed their jurisdiction. Brown v. Oneida County, 103 Wis. 149, 79 N. W. 216. Judicial review of the action of boards of review on certiorari extends only to jurisdictional errors. State ex rel. Miller v. Thompson, 151 Wis. 184, 138 N. W. 628;State ex rel. M. A. Hanna D. Co. v. Willcuts, 143 Wis. 449, 128 N. W. 97. If a board of review does not act arbitrarily or dishonestly, and the evidence presented before it is sufficient to furnish any substantial basis for the valuation found by the board, its decision will not be disturbed. State ex rel. Kimberly-Clark Co. v. Williams, 160 Wis. 648, 152 N. W. 450. The review here extends only to correction of jurisdictional errors, and does not include mere errors of judgment as to the preponderance of the evidence. State ex rel. Edward Hines L. Co. v. Fisher, 129 Wis. 57, 108 N. W. 206. Upon certiorari to a nonjudicial body such as a board of review the court will review the evidence only so far as to ascertain if there is reasonable ground for belief that the decision is the result of honest judgment, in which case it will not be disturbed. State ex rel. N. C. Foster L. Co. v. Williams, 123 Wis. 61, 100 N. W. 1048;State ex rel. Vilas v. Wharton, 117 Wis. 558, 94 N. W. 359. This court will review the proceedings to ascertain whether such body has kept within its jurisdiction, and whether such board acted upon competent evidence sufficient to give it jurisdiction. State ex rel....