Territory of Arizona v. Board of Sup'rs of Yavapai County

Decision Date20 January 1906
Docket NumberCivil 934
Citation84 P. 519,9 Ariz. 405
PartiesTERRITORY OF ARIZONA, Plaintiff, v. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF YAVAPAI COUNTY, ARIZONA, Composed of D. G. Sinclair et al., and JOHN H. ROBINSON, as Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of Yavapai County, Respondents
CourtArizona Supreme Court

APPLICATION for a Writ of Mandamus. Demurrer sustained.

On appeal to the United States Supreme Court.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

E. S Clark, Attorney-General, for Plaintiff.

E. E Ellinwood, Herring & Sorin, and Charles L. Rawlins, for Respondents.

OPINION

SLOAN, J.

-- The territory, by and at the relation of the attorney-general, has filed its petition in this court, praying for a writ of mandamus to issue against the board of supervisors of Yavapai County and its clerk, to require them to add to and carry out upon the assessment-roll of said county certain increased valuations ordered by the territorial board of equalization to be placed upon said assessment-roll, and to compute and carry out thereon the territorial tax fixed by the order of said territorial board of equalization.

The petition alleges that said territorial board of equalization, pursuant to law, met at the office of the territorial auditor of the territory, on the fourth day of August, 1905, and continued in session until the seventeenth day of August, 1905; that at said session said board examined the various assessments and abstracts of assessment-rolls, which had theretofore been returned by the various counties as required by law; that by an examination made of the various assessment-rolls and abstracts so returned, the said board, at said session, ascertained that the scale of valuations had not been adjusted with reasonable uniformity by the various assessors and county boards of equalization for the year 1905, and further found specifically the percentages of the actual cash value of the various classes of property returned, as shown by said abstracts. These percentages are set forth in a table incorporated into the petition. The petition further alleges that the valuation of certain property, as shown by said returns, did not, in the judgment of the board, bear a just relation to all other valuations of property in the territory, and that therefore it became and was necessary, in the judgment of the board, to increase the valuations of certain property appearing upon said abstracts, in order to equalize the same, and to produce a just relation between all the valuations of property in the territory; that pursuant to said finding the board determined the percentages of said increase that should be made upon the assessment-rolls of the various counties upon the following classes of property: Patented mines, improvements on patented mines, milch cows, mules, saddle-horses, work-horses, range-horses, town and city lots. That as to the first class of property, -- to wit, patented mines, -- the territorial board had, at a meeting held prior to August, 1905, required the same to be added to the classification of property prescribed by the statute; that pursuant to said finding and order, the said board, on the seventeenth day of August, 1905, further ordered that the percentages of increase found necessary to be added upon certain of these classes, which were found not to bear a fair relation or proportion to the valuation in other counties in the territory, be added to the assessed valuation of such property in Yavapai County; that each of said classes so ordered to be raised as aforesaid is a class of property appearing and assessed as such class on the assessment-roll of said county for the year 1905, and for many years prior thereto; that in making and ordering the said increases, the said board increased the valuation of said property in said county as much and no more than in its judgment was necessary to produce a just relation between all the valuations of property in the territory, and that the increases so made and ordered were each and all found to be just and necessary for the purpose aforesaid by said board; that the property included in the several classes, the valuation of which was increased as aforesaid, was not thereby raised beyond its full cash value.

It is further set forth in the petition that since and including the year 1887 the territorial board of equalization has raised the valuation of classes of property substantially in manner and form as it did for the year 1905, and has in each of said years thereby raised the aggregate valuation of all the property of the territory as returned by the assessors and supervisors of the several counties; that since said year it has been and become the settled practice and usage of said board to raise valuations by classes, and thereby to raise the aggregate valuation of all the property of all the counties of the territory; which practice and usage have been assented to, acquiesced in, and carried into effect by the county and territorial officers charged with any duty in that regard. It is further alleged that thereafter, and before the fourth Monday in August, 1905, the territorial auditor duly transmitted to the board of supervisors of Yavapai County, and the clerk of said board, a statement of the changes which had been made in the assessment by said board of equalization, and the rate of tax to be levied and collected within said county for territorial purposes; which said statement was duly received by said board of supervisors, and by its clerk on or before the said fourth Monday in August, 1905; that it became thereby and was the duty of said board of supervisors, and of its clerk, to add to and carry out upon the assessment-roll of said county the changes so ordered by said territorial board of equalization, as shown in said statement, and to compute and carry out in the proper column on said assessment-roll the territorial tax upon the valuation so increased as aforesaid, and as shown by said statement, and at the rate as shown therein; but the said board, and its said clerk, wrongfully and unlawfully refused and neglected, and still refuse and neglect, to add to and carry out upon said assessment-roll the changes and increased valuations aforesaid, and to compute and carry out in the proper column on said roll the territorial tax aforesaid upon said valuations; that demand was made upon said defendants to carry out the said order of said board of equalization prior to the commencement of the action. To the petition the defendants have demurred, upon the ground that it appears upon the face thereof that the same does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, or to entitle plaintiff to the issuance of said writ.

Counsel for defendants in their briefs have argued two propositions 1. That the petition shows upon its face that the territorial board of equalization in increasing the aggregate valuation of all the property of the territory, as shown by the assessment-rolls of the various counties, and in making this increase upon classes of property within the various counties affected, and not...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Bunten v. Rock Springs Grazing Association
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • May 8, 1923
    ... ... to District Court, Sweetwater County; JOHN R. ARNOLD, Judge ... Action ... County Board of Equalization adjourned August 2, 1919, sine ... for, since the organization of the territory, and ... upon the admission of the state, the ... ...
  • Baker v. Paxton
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • May 8, 1923
    ... ... to District Court, Platte County; WM. C. MENTZER, Judge ... Action ... had expired at the time the state board ... ordered the increase in valuations ... Pitcher, 61 Colo. 149, 156 P. 812; Territory v ... First National Bank, 10 N.M. 283, 303, ... ...
  • Covington v. Basich Bros. Const. Co.
    • United States
    • Arizona Supreme Court
    • July 3, 1951
    ...is spelled out by constitutional or statutory law and where there is no plain and speedy remedy at law. Territory v. Board of Supervisors, Yavapai County, 9 Ariz. 405, 84 P. 519; Riley v. Cornwall, 48 Ariz. 10, 58 P.2d In forfeiting this guarantee the highway commission was in the exercise ......
  • State ex rel. Showalter v. Cook
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • December 11, 1933
    ... ... 364 STATE ex rel. SHOWALTER .v COOK, County Assessor. No. 24873. Supreme Court of ... by the state board of equalization on September 23, 1933 ... 695, 51 L.Ed. 1143; ... Territory v. Board of Supervisors, 9 Ariz. 405, 84 ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT