State v. Ellis

• Decision Date: 28 January 1895
• Citation: 38 P. 1079,15 Mont. 224
• Parties: STATE ex rel. BEALL v. ELLIS et al.
• Court: Montana Supreme Court

38 P. 1079

15 Mont. 224

STATE ex rel. BEALL v. ELLIS et al.

Supreme Court of Montana

January 28, 1895

Certiorari upon relation of W. J. Beall against the board of commissioners and clerk of the county of Gallatin to review their action in increasing the valuation of property as fixed by the board of appraisers.Dismissed.

E. P Cadwell, for relator.

John C Luce, H. J. Haskell, and Ella L. Knowles, for respondents.

PEMBERTON C.J.

This is an application for a writ of certiorari.The applicant is a resident taxpayer in the city of Bozeman, in the county of Gallatin.The respondents comprise the board of county commissioners and the clerk of said county.The applicant is the owner of considerable real estate situate in said city of Bozeman.He alleges that about the 19th day of February 1894, the board of appraisers of said county met and fixed the valuation of said real estate for said year, which he says was the true and fair value thereof; that thereafter the assessor of said county listed said real estate, and assessed the same in accordance with the valuation thereof fixed by said board of appraisers, and duly returned the same as so listed and assessed; that on or about the 31st day of July 1894, the respondents, acting as the board of equalization of said county, raised the valuation of said real estate as fixed by said board of appraisers, and listed, assessed, and returned by said assessor.Notice of the intention of said board of equalization to raise or increase the valuation of the real estate of the applicant was duly served upon him and he appeared before said board in pursuance thereof, and protested in writing against this contemplated action of said board.The applicant offered no evidence in support of his protest showing that any injury or injustice would result to him from the action of the said board, nor does he complain in this court that any injury or injustice has resulted from said action of said board.In his protest filed before said board of equalization the applicant contended, and in his application for the writ of certiorari in this court contends, that said board had no jurisdiction to raise or increase the valuation of his real estate, for the reason that the board of appraisers had fixed the true and fair value of said property.Counsel for applicant, in their brief, say: "This cause depends upon a construction of sections 60, 61, p. 96, Laws Mont. 1891, and the act amendatory thereof in Laws 1893, p. 64."Section 60, above referred to, provides that the board of county commissioners shall be the board of equalization, "to examine the assessment book and adjust and equalize the valuation of the taxable property of the county"; and also fixes the time when said board shall meet, and says how long it shall remain in session.Section 61, supra, is as follows: "The board has power, after giving notice in such manner as it may by rule prescribe, to increase or lower any assessment contained in the assessment book, so as to equalize the valuation of the property contained therein and make the assessment conform to the valuation of such property.Said board of county commissioners is vested with full power to make any changes in the valuation of property, whether such change relates to an entire class or to particular items of property, real or personal, and they shall make such changes as will result in a fair valuation of property within the meaning of this act."The act of 1893, referred to in applicant's brief, is an act entitled "An act to amend sections 58and59 of an act entitled 'An act concerning revenue,' approved March 6, 1891," said sections 60and61 being parts of the act amended.Said amended sections 58and59 of the act of...