Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Wallace v. State Board of Equalization

Montana Supreme Court

Decided September 28, 1896PublishedCited by 16 opinions

Original Proceeding. — Application for a writ of certiorari to review the action of the State Board of Equalization, consisting of the governor, secretary of state, state treasurer, state auditor and attorney general, in increasing the total valuation of property returned to it by the assessors and county boards of equalization of the several counties. Statement of the case by the justice delivering the opinion. The relators are resident taxpayers in the state of Montana.

Read the full summary

Original Proceeding. — Application for a writ of certiorari to review the action of the State Board of Equalization, consisting of the governor, secretary of state, state treasurer, state auditor and attorney general, in increasing the total valuation of property returned to it by the assessors and county boards of equalization of the several counties. Statement of the case by the justice delivering the opinion. The relators are resident taxpayers in the state of Montana. The respondent, the State Board of Equalization, is composed by law of the state officers above named. It is charged in…

1Opinion of the CourtPemberton, C. J.

The principal question presented for adjudication is as to the power of the State Board of Equal*475ization under our constitution to so increase the valuation of property returned to it by the assessors and county boards of equalization of the several counties as to increase or decrease the total valuation of property of the state as fixed by the county boards and assessors. The relators contend that under the constitution of the state the respondent board had no power to make such change and increase in the total valuation of the property of the state. Sec. 15, Article XII, of our constitution…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Wells, Fargo & Co. v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  2. St. Joseph Lead Co. v. SimmsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Hilger v. MooreMontana Supreme Court · 1919
  2. Hacker v. HoweNebraska Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Ames v. People ex rel. TempleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1899
  4. South Spring Ranch & Cattle Co. v. State Board of EqualizationNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1914
  5. State ex rel. Cunningham v. ThomasUtah Supreme Court · 1897

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API