Kyncl v. Kenosha County

155 N.W.2d 583, 37 Wis. 2d 547, 1968 Wisc. LEXIS 942
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 30, 1968
StatusPublished
Cited by31 cases

This text of 155 N.W.2d 583 (Kyncl v. Kenosha County) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Kyncl v. Kenosha County, 155 N.W.2d 583, 37 Wis. 2d 547, 1968 Wisc. LEXIS 942 (Wis. 1968).

Opinion

Beilfuss, J.

The issue is whether Kenosha county was a party to the condemnation award within the meaning of sec. 32.05 (9), Stats., so that service on the county *551 was sufficient to give the court jurisdiction over the necessary parties.

When land is needed for state trunk highway improvement the state highway commission may provide for its acquisition under sec. 84.09, Stats. Sub. (1) provides that the commission may take the necessary action to acquire the land and, if it does, title to the land shall be taken in the name of the state. By virtue of sub. (3) (a) the commission may order that all or part of the land be acquired by the county highway committee and, if so, title is taken in the name of the county. Under sub. (3m) the commission may order a board, commission or department of a city to acquire lands located within the city and in those instances title is taken in the name of the state.

As the trial court noted in its memorandum opinion, a copy of the relocation order of the state highway commission and copies of the awards were not presented to the court. Consequently, these documents are not of record on appeal. The plaintiffs’ petitions before the trial court stated, however, that the county highway committee of Kenosha county, acting pursuant to authority vested in it by the state highway commission of Wisconsin and pursuant to statute, condemned the properties of the plaintiffs for state trunk highway purposes. We, therefore, assume the state highway commission ordered the county highway committee of Kenosha county to acquire the land of the appellants.

Sec. 84.09 (3) (a), Stats., provides:

“The commission may order that all or certain parts of the required land or interests therein be acquired by the county highway committee. When so ordered, the committee and the commission shall appraise and agree on the maximum price, including damages, considered reasonable for the lands or interests to be so acquired. The committee shall endeavor to obtain easements or title in fee simple by conveyance of the lands or interests required, as directed in the commission’s order. The instrument of conveyance shall name the county as *552 grantee, shall be subject to approval by the commission, and shall be recorded in the office of the register of deeds and filed with the commission. If the needed lands or interests therein cannot be purchased expeditiously within the appraised price, the county highway committee may acquire them by condemnation under ch. 32.”

The plaintiffs’ appeals from the awards were taken directly to the circuit court for Kenosha county in accordance with the provisions of sec. 32.05 (11), Stats.: 1

“Waiver Of Hearing Before Commission ; Appeal To Circuit Court And Jury. The owner of any interest in the property condemned named in the basic award may elect to waive the appeal procedure specified in sub. (9) and instead, within 2 years after the date of taking, appeal to the circuit court of the county wherein the property is located. The notice of appeal shall be served as provided in sub. (9) (a). Filing of the notice of appeal shall constitute such waiver. The clerk shall thereupon enter the appeal as an action pending in said court with the condemnee as plaintiff and the condemnor as defendant. It shall proceed as an action in said court subject to all the provisions of law relating to actions originally brought therein and shall have precedence over all other actions not then on trial. The sole issues to be tried shall be questions of title, if any, under ss. 32.11 and 32.12 and the amount of just compensation to be paid by con-demnor. It shall be tried by jury unless waived by both plaintiff and. defendant. The amount of the jurisdictional offer or basic award shall not be disclosed to the jury during such trial. Where one party in interest has appealed from the award, no other party in interest who has been served with notice of such appeal may take a separate appeal but may join in the appeal by serving notice upon the condemnor and the appellant of his election to do so. Such notice shall be given by certified mail or personal service within 10 days after receipt of notice of the appeal and shall be filed with the clerk of court. Upon failure to give such notice such parties shall be deemed not to have appealed. The appeal shall *553 not affect parties who have not joined in the appeal as herein provided. In cases involving more than one party-in interest with a right to appeal, the first of such parties filing an appeal under sub. (9) or under this subsection shall determine whether such appeal shall be under sub. (9) or directly to the circuit court as here provided. No party in interest may file an appeal under this subsection if another party in interest in the same lands has filed a prior appeal complying with the requirements of sub. (9). In cases involving multiple ownership or interests in lands taken the provisions of s. 32.05 (9) (a) 1, 2 and 3 shall govern. . . .” (Emphasis supplied.)

As the statute provides, to commence such an action a notice of appeal must be served as provided in sec. 32.05 (9) (a), Stats.:

“Any party having an interest in the property condemned may, within 2 years after the date of taking, appeal the award .... Such application shall contain a description of the property condemned and the names and last known addresses of all parties in interest .... Notice of such application shall be given to the clerk of the court and to all other persons other than the applicant who were parties to the award. . . .”

Sec. 32.05 (11), Stats., expressly makes the “condem-nor” the defendant. As such, the condemnor is clearly entitled to notice under sec. 32.05 (9) (a), being both a party to the award and an “interested party.”

The last sentence of sec. 84.09 (3) (a), Stats., provides: “If the needed lands or interests therein cannot be purchased expeditiously within the appraised price, the county highway committee may acquire them by condemnation under ch. 32.” Respondent urges the county highway committee, not the county, is the “condemnor” under the statutory framework. Appellants contend the county is the condemnor by virtue of the fact that title was conveyed to the county.

It is solely by order of the state highway commission that the county highway committee performs its duties *554 in condemning the required lands. The lands condemned pursuant to sec. 84.09 (3) (a), Stats., are condemned for state trunk highways. 2 The county highway committee acquires absolutely no interest in the property condemned. The county is named as grantee in the instrument of conveyance, but the title is only a “naked” legal title to the property which the county holds at the pleasure of the state highway commission. Sec. 84.09 (3) (b) provides:

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Greenwald Family Limited Partnership v. Village of Mukwonago
2023 WI 53 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2023)
Jackson County v. State Department of Natural Resources
2006 WI 96 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2006)
LANDINGS LLC v. City of Waupaca
2005 WI App 181 (Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, 2005)
State Ex Rel. Grzelak v. Bertrand
2003 WI 102 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2003)
State v. Sorenson
2000 WI 43 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2000)
Outagamie County v. Town of Greenville
2000 WI App 65 (Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, 2000)
Weber v. DODGE CTY. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
604 N.W.2d 297 (Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, 1999)
Weber v. Dodge County Planning & Development Department
604 N.W.2d 297 (Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, 1999)
State Department of Transportation v. Peterson
594 N.W.2d 765 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1999)
State Department of Transportation v. Peterson
581 N.W.2d 539 (Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, 1998)
Jeanine B. Ex Rel. Blondis v. Thompson
877 F. Supp. 1268 (E.D. Wisconsin, 1995)
Opinion No. Oag 16-91, (1991)
80 Op. Att'y Gen. 91 (Wisconsin Attorney General Reports, 1991)
Trojan v. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System
311 N.W.2d 586 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1981)
Brown County v. Department of Health & Social Services
307 N.W.2d 247 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1981)
Opinion No. Oag 24-80, (1980)
69 Op. Att'y Gen. 103 (Wisconsin Attorney General Reports, 1980)
Opinion No. Oag 5-77, (1977)
66 Op. Att'y Gen. 15 (Wisconsin Attorney General Reports, 1977)
City of Madison v. Hyland, Hall & Co.
243 N.W.2d 422 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1976)
Opinion No. Oag 28-76, (1976)
65 Op. Att'y Gen. 62 (Wisconsin Attorney General Reports, 1976)
State v. Rosen
240 N.W.2d 168 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
155 N.W.2d 583, 37 Wis. 2d 547, 1968 Wisc. LEXIS 942, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kyncl-v-kenosha-county-wis-1968.