Beres v. City of New Berlin
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHeffernan, J.
It is well settled that mandamus will not lie to compel the performance of an official act when the officer’s duty is not clear and requires the exercise of judgment and discretion. Wisconsin Pharmaceutical Asso. v. Lee (1953), 264 Wis. 325, 58 N. W. (2d) 700. It is equally true that “mandamus is not a proper remedy to control the acts of municipal bodies when acting within the scope of their legal powers, on matters in respect of which they are vested with discretion . . . .” 55 C. J. S., Mandamus, p. 212, sec. 124 (2).
This court has held that the exercise of the zoning power is “a field of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Eggebeen v. SonnenburgWisconsin Supreme Court · 1941
- Jefferson County v. TimmelWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
- City of La Crosse v. ElbertsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
- State Ex Rel. Racine County v. SchmidtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
- Wisconsin Pharmaceutical Asso. v. LeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Willow Creek Ranch, L.L.C. v. Town of ShelbyWisconsin Supreme Court · 2000
- Nodell Investment Corp. v. City of GlendaleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
- Cartwright v. SharpeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- Hermann v. Town of DelavanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1998
- State Ex Rel. Thomas v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1972
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.