Green Lake County v. City of Eau Claire
Green Lake County v. City of Eau Claire
Opinion of the Court
The following opinion was filed March 5, 1918:
It is claimed by the plaintiff that by virtue of the provisions of sec. 2822, Stats., the notice of disallowance • of the claim having been served by mail as provided in sec. 2821, the time within which an appeal might be taken was doubled, pursuant to the provisions of sec. 2822, and that the notice of appeal was served in time. The procedure in matters relating to claims of one municipality against another for aid furnished to poor persons is prescribed by sec. 1512, Stats. 1917. The part thereof material here is as follows:
“The clerk of any town, city or village disallowing any such claim on the part of a county shall, within the same time and in like mánner, give notice of such disallowance and until the same is received by the county clerk the time within which an appeal may be taken from such allowance or an action commenced shall not begin to run. The mailing within such ten days, by the proper officer, of any notice herein provided for, in the manner provided by section 2821 of the statutes, shall be a sufficient service of such notice.”
Sec. 25 of ch. VII of the revised charter of the city of Eau Claire (Laws 1889, ch. 184) reads as follows:
“When any claim of any person, persons, company or cor*306 poration against the city shall be disallowed, in whole or in part by the common council, such person, persons, company or corporation may appeal from the decision of the council disallowing such claim to the circuit court of the county of Eau Claire by causing a written notice of such appeal to be served on the clerk of said city within twenty days after the action of said council in disallowing such claim, and executing a bond to the said city with a sufficient surety, to be approved by the clerk, or a court commissioner of Eau Claire county, conditioned for the faithful prosecution of such appeal, and the payment of all costs that shall be adjudged against the appellant by the court.”
The real question is, of course, Does sec. 2822 apply to appeals taken pursuant to the provisions of the charter of the city of Eau Claire in cases within sec. 1612? Secs. 2821 and 2822 are under the title “Proceedings in civil actions in courts of record.” Good reasons might be given why this section does not apply. We feel, however, that where possible the statutes should be so construed as to protect the rights of parties in furtherance of justice. While an appeal from the disallowance of a claim by the common council of the city of Eau Claire is clearly not a proceeding in a court of record, nevertheless it is the commencement of an action, and the proper way, if not the only way, to proceed against the city, and we think it was the intention of the legislature, in prescribing that notice of disallowance of the claim might be served in the manner prescribed by sec. 2821, that service so made should be followed by the consequences provided in sec. 2822, and that the notice of appeal, therefore, in this case was in time. This seems a natural and reasonable construction, and if it does not conform to the legislative intent the remedy is plain and simple.
It is claimed that Stevens v. Wheeler, 43 Wis. 91, rules this case. In that case there was an appeal from an order overruling a demurrer. It does not appear that there was any notice of entry of the order, but on the evening of the
By the Court. — Judgment reversed, and cause remanded for further proceedings according to law.
070rehearing
Tbe following opinion was filed April 30, 1918:
Tbe motion for rehearing is based upon two grounds: (1) because sec. 926 — 100, Stats., is decisive of tbe question involved, and (2) because sec. 926 — 100,‘ Stats., is not mentioned in tbe opinion of tbe court and was apparently overlooked.
It is thought by the moving pa¡rty that the decision in this casé in effect repeals tbe provisions of sec. 926 — 100, where service of notice of tbe disallowance of a claim is made by registered letter as therein provided. The material provisions of sec. 926 — 100 are as follows:
“If tbe claimant be a nonresident tbe clerk shall transmit such notice by registered letter through tbe mail. Any time*308 limited for appeal bj tbe claimant from tbe determination of bis claim by tbe council, shall begin to run when sucb notice is served, or wben sucb registered letter is received.”
Tbe decision was intended to bold no more than that sec. 2822, Stats., applies to appeals taken pursuant to tbe provisions of tbe charter of tbe city of Eau Glaire in cases within sec. 1512, Stats. Sec. 1512 prescribes bow appeals in cases embraced within its terms shall be taken, bow notice of tbe disallowance of tbe claim shall be served, and governs in matters of claims filed under that section and appeals taken from tbe disallowance thereof, and no further. It was not intended to bold, and tbe decision does not bold, that secs. 2821 and 2822, Stats., have any application to appeals taken pursuant to tbe provisions of sec. 926 — 100, except as to cases arising under sec. 1512.,
By the Court. — Motion for rehearing denied, without costs.
Reference
- Status
- Published