State ex rel. Smith v. Cooper
| Citation | 59 Wis. 666,18 N.W. 438 |
| Parties | STATE EX REL. SMITH v. COOPER, TOWN CLERK, ETC. |
| Decision Date | 19 February 1884 |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from circuit court, Milwaukee county.Hugh Ryan, for respondent, the State of Wisconsin ex rel. James Smith.
Cotzhausen, Sylvester, Scheiber & Jones, for appellant, Peter C. Cooper, town clerk, etc.
This is a common-law certiorari from the circuit court of Milwaukee county, directed to the clerk of the town of Greenfield, in said county, to return to said court the record and proceedings of the board of review of assessments of said town, and to reverse the determination of said board increasing the assessment of the property of the relator, James Smith. The return shows the following facts and proceedings: The relator appeared and was present at the meeting of the board, and voluntarily presented a list of mortgage securities belonging to him in said town, in addition to the property listed by him to the assessor, to the amount of $6,475, and which increased the assessment of the assessor to that amount. By this act he submitted to the jurisdiction of said board, and waived all pretended irregularities in their meeting. We shall, therefore, not consider any such objections, which he pretended to reserve on such appearance, and which he urges in this court. An appearance simply and solely to protest against the jurisdiction of the court is not such an appearance as waives such questions, but an appearance protesting, and yet submitting voluntarily, to such tribunal, on the merits of the case, and presenting evidence, and asking for a judgment of such tribunal in his favor on the merits of the controversy, is a waiver thereof. This is an elementary rule, which requires no citation of authority. We shall therefore dispose of the case on the return.
The relator had made out the usual statement of his taxable property, with his deductions from his taxable credits of his debts, according to section 1056, Rev. St., and returned the same to the assessor of said town. The entire value of his taxable property, as so made out and returned by him, was the sum of $1,695. In this statement was included the average amount of his notes, bonds, mortgages, and other securities for debts due or to become due, over and above the average amount of the bona fide unconditional debts owing by him, at the sum of $1,000. This statement was not verified as the law requires, but it was nevertheless the voluntary statement of the relator, by which he is bound and estopped as much as if it had been verified. After presenting to the board said verified statement of mortgage securities not included in the statement to the assessor, the relator claimed orally that he was entitled to a much greater deduction than appeared upon his statement to the assessor. The knowledge of such debts of the tax-payer is not presumed to be in the board of review, but in the tax-payer himself, and after the relator had presented his additional list of property liable to taxation, consisting of such credits, he held the affirmative, and it was his duty to present the evidence thereof to the board. He presented no competent or sufficient evidence of such debts, and besides that he refused to be sworn and examined in relation thereto on the request of the board. The ex parte affidavit of Thomas W. Smith was no evidence at all of such fact, for he does not pretendthat he personally knew anything...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Inland Lumber & Timber Co. v. Thompson
... ... No part ... of the public domain is taxable by the state, and land is not ... severed from the public domain until at least the ... had furnished a verified statement. ( State v ... Cooper, 59 Wis. 666, 18 N.W. 438; Phelps Mtg. Co. v ... Board of ... ...
-
Territory of Arizona v. Copper Queen Consolidated Mining Co.
...a voluntary statement by the appellee of the manner in which its property might be properly assessed. State ex rel. Smith v. Cooper, 59 Wis. 666, 18 N.W. 438. The most important question raised upon the record is as to the validity of the action of the board of supervisors, sitting as the b......
-
Mckesson-Fuller-Morrison Co. v. Indus. Comm'n
...body is of a quasi judicial nature. It has been applied in this state in proceedings before boards of review. State ex rel. Smith v. Cooper, 59 Wis. 666, 18 N. W. 438;State ex rel. Smith v. Gaylord, 73 Wis. 306, 41 N. W. 518;Bogue v. Laughlin, 149 Wis. 271, 136 N. W. 606, 40 L. R. A. (N. S.......
-
Robinson Land & Lumber Co. v. Roberson
...taxable property given by him to the assessor. People v. Atkinson, 103 Ill. 45, followed." Dull v. Lefevre et al., 222 F. 471; State v. Cooper (Wis.), 18 N.W. 438. might add in passing that in this case just quoted from the Wisconsin court quoted to approve the language of the chief justice......