Williams v. City of Saginaw

16 N.W. 260, 51 Mich. 120, 1883 Mich. LEXIS 535
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedJune 20, 1883
StatusPublished
Cited by21 cases

This text of 16 N.W. 260 (Williams v. City of Saginaw) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Williams v. City of Saginaw, 16 N.W. 260, 51 Mich. 120, 1883 Mich. LEXIS 535 (Mich. 1883).

Opinion

Cooley, J.

It appeal’s by the finding of facts that the partnership of which plaintiff is the survivor was lawfully assessable in the city for personal property for the year 1879, and that there was no want of jurisdiction in the comptroller in the assessment which he made. The question, then, resolves itself into this: whether the assessment was excessive. - This is not a question for the courts to try: the statute has provided a board of review to which appeals may be taken, and has declared that its decision shall be final. Local Acts 1875, p. 295.

[121]*121Tlie plaintiff contends tliat inasmuch as the partners were not residents of the city they were not bound to take notice 'of any assessment made against them there, or to appeal from it if they deemed it unjust. This would be true if there were no jurisdiction to assess a personal tax against them there. Bemis v. Boston 14 Allen 366; Fairbanks v. Kittredge 24 Vt. 9; Charlestown v. County Com’rs 109 Mass. 270; Judkins v. Reed 48 Me. 386; McCoy v. Anderson 47 Mich. 502.

But this, we have seen, was not the case. The partnership had a place of business within the city, and personal property there which confessedly was taxable. Nothing more was necessary to render legal the assessment actually made. No fraud is charged against the comptroller, and it affirmatively appears, though the fact is not legally important, that the partnership was not assessed elsewhere for such of its personalty as wai-j within the city.

The defendant is entitled to judgment on the finding with costs of both courts.

The other Justices concurred.

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

Related

Continental Motors Corp. v. Township of Muskegon
133 N.W.2d 163 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1965)
Hack v. City of Detroit
34 N.W.2d 66 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1948)
Greilick v. City of Traverse City
204 N.W. 718 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1925)
Elmendorf v. City of San Antonio
242 S.W. 185 (Texas Commission of Appeals, 1922)
Story & Clark Piano Co. v. Hilderink
155 N.W. 445 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1915)
Graham v. City of Grand Rapids
146 N.W. 248 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1914)
Fletcher Paper Co. v. City of Alpena
137 N.W. 640 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1912)
Petoskey & Bay Shore Gas Co. v. City of Petoskey
127 N.W. 345 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1910)
City of Port Huron v. Wright
114 N.W. 76 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1907)
Jones v. Gable
113 N.W. 577 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1907)
City of Detroit v. Jacobs
108 N.W. 671 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1906)
Ward v. Township of Echo
108 N.W. 364 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1906)
Power v. City of Detroit
102 N.W. 288 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1905)
Steinmuller v. City of Kansas City
44 P. 600 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 1896)
Auditor General v. Chandler
66 N.W. 482 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1896)
Brown v. City of Grand Rapids
47 N.W. 117 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1890)
Peninsula Iron & Lumber Co. v. Township of Crystal Falls
27 N.W. 666 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1886)
Curtis v. Township of Richland
23 N.W. 175 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1885)
Comstock v. City of Grand Rapids
20 N.W. 623 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1884)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
16 N.W. 260, 51 Mich. 120, 1883 Mich. LEXIS 535, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-city-of-saginaw-mich-1883.