State v. Mills

• Decision Date: 12 July 1921
• Docket Number: 17051
• Citation: 132 N.E. 727,103 Ohio St. 172
• Parties: The State, Ex Rel. The Tax Commission Of Ohio, v. Mills, Auditor Of Clark County, Et Al.]
• Court: Ohio Supreme Court

132 N.E. 727

103 Ohio St. 172

The State, Ex Rel. The Tax Commission Of Ohio, v. Mills, Auditor Of Clark County, Et Al.]

No. 17051

Supreme Court of Ohio

July 12, 1921

Mandamus - Taxation - Assessing real estate - Aggregate valuation reduced by county commissioners - Section 5548, General Code -Remedy to restore reduction - Section 5613, General Code - State tax commission - Authority to increase aggregate valuations.

1. Mandamus being an extraordinary remedy, such writ will not issue where there is a plain and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.

2. A writ of mandamus will not issue, upon application of the state tax commission, to direct and control the action of a county auditor or a board of county commissioners as to matters upon which the tax commission is expressly authorized by statute to act, or to correct errors which such commission is empowered by statute to rectify.

-

This is an original action brought in this court by the tax commission of Ohio against the county auditor and the members of the board of county commissioners of Clark county. In the petition the relator avers that such investigations proceedings and orders were had by the defendant, the county auditor, and his predecessor in office, that he found the real estate in each taxing subdivision of Clark county to be assessed at its true value in money for the tax year 1921 and such finding was duly submitted to the county commissioners of said county as required by law; that the board of county commissioners upon hearing, after due notice thereof, found and determined that all the real estate in each tax subdivision of said county was not assessed for taxation purposes at its true value in money, and ordered that a general or horizontal decrease of said assessment so submitted by the county auditor of 10 per cent. of the total value be made, and that the assessment list or duplicate in all subdivisions be changed by reducing all of the real estate valuations 10 per cent. of the total valuation; that the county auditor, unless otherwise ordered by the court, will proceed to apply and put into effect the order of the county commissioners, which 'it is averred will result in a loss of a large amount of taxes which would otherwise be due the county and state for the year 1921; and that the county commissioners refuse to make any change in their said order or take any action in the premises, and the county auditor refuses to comply with the demand of the relator that he should ignore that part of the order of the board of county commissioners making such 10 per cent decrease. The relator therefore prays for a writ of mandamus requiring the county commissioners to set aside and vacate their action complained of, or that the county auditor be required to ignore that part of the commissioners' order making such reduction and be required to proceed with the reassessment of said real estate as required by law.

The answer contained four defenses: (1) A general denial. (2) That the tax commission has an adequate remedy at law. (3) That the mat- ters set up in the petition of the relator were formerly adjudicated in an action in the court of appeals of Clark county, wherein it is alleged the relator in this action was in privity with the defendant William C. Mills, as county auditor, which action was one in mandamus against the board of county commissioners, involving the same question herein presented, and that the court of appeals in that action found and adjudged the demurrer of the board of county commissioners to...