Swamp-Land Reclamation District No. 407 v. Wilcox
Before: Belcher
Synopsis
Swamp Lands—Assessments—Order of Board of Supervisors— Alteration—Evidence.—In an action by a swamp-land reclamation district to enforce the payment of a swamp-land assessment, plaintiff offered in evidence an order appearing in the “minute-book” of the board of supervisors, in which, by Political Code, sections 4029-4031, all orders of the board are required to be recorded; and it was conceded that, without the direction of the board, the order had been altered by B., who at the time of the entry, but not at the time of the alteration, was ex-officio clerk of the board. B. testified, against objection, that he made the alteration to correct what appeared to him, on examination,' to be a clerical error of his deputy, now deceased, the then acting clerk of the board. The “rough minute-book,” containing the original entry from which the record was made, and to which the altered record conformed, was also admitted against objection. Held, that it was error for the court to admit the order in evidence.
Swamp Lands — Assessment •— Record — Alteration—Parol Evidence.—Held, further, that the order was a record which B. had no right to alter or amend, and that parol proof was inadmissible to correct or change the record.
Swamp Land—Assessment Lists—Description.—Under Political Code, section 3461, requiring. certain assessment lists to contain “a description, by legal subdivisions, swamp-land surveys, or natural boundaries,” a description, naming the adjoining proprietors on the respective boundaries, is sufficient.
Swamp Land — Assessments and Benefits — Duty of Commissioners.—Political Code, section 3456, provides that assessments for swamp-land improvements shall be proportionate to the resulting benefit, and section 3461 provides, among other requisites, that the list must contain “the amount of the charge assessed against each tract.” The list in question conformed to the requirements of section 3461. Held, that the commissioners were not required to report that, in making the assessment, they had complied with section 3456, and that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, they must be presumed to have regularly performed their official duty.
Swamp Land—Assessment List.—In an Action to Enforce the Payment of a swamp-land assessment, it appeared that, in the assessment list, there was no dollar-mark before the figures opposite defendant’s name, under the heading “Amount of charges assessed.” In a number of assessments the dollar-mark preceded the figures under that heading, and in others the mark did not appear. Held, that the figures must be construed to represent dollars.
Swamp Land—Oath of Commissioners.—The Commissioners of Swamp-land Assessments were verbally sworn before viewing the land, but it did not appear that they subscribed their oath and filed it in the county clerk’s office, as required of all “officers” by Political Code, sections 904, 909. Held, that whether the commissioners were or were not “officers,” within the meaning of those sections, a failure of strict compliance with their requirements would not avoid official acts fully performed.
BELCHER, C. C. This is an action to enforce payment of a swamp-land assessment. The plaintiff was organized as a swamp-land district in January, 1882, to reclaim certain swamp lands situate on Andrus island, in Sacramento county; and, as alleged in the complaint, the assessment sought to be recovered was thereafter regularly levied on land owned by the defendant within the district. In the court below judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiff, from which, and from an order denying a new trial, the defendant has appealed.
The validity of the assessment is assailed by the appellant upon several grounds, but they need not all be noticed.
[796]In support of the averment that commissioners were appointed to view the lands of the district, and to assess upon them the proper charge for their reclamation, the plaintiff offered in evidence at the trial an order appearing in minute-book “K” of the records of the board of supervisors, which read as follows:
“Office of the Board of Supervisors, “Friday, August 25, 1882.
“Swamp-land district No. 407. The report of the trustees of swamp-land district No. 407, was received and the following report adopted: 1 Ordered that J. M. Upham, J. M. Stephenson, and John Miller, three competent and disinterested persons and residents of Sacramento county, be, and are hereby, appointed commissioners, who must, in the manner provided by law, view the land of said district and assess thereupon the proper assessment and charge for the reclamation of said land, to wit: The sum of $78,000, in the manner and at the cost surveyed, planned and estimated by J. C. Pierson, engineer of said district, and by the board of trustees filed this day with the clerk of this board.’ ”
The defendant objected to the entry being received in evidence upon the ground that when made it was an order appointing commissioners to view and assess a charge on lands in swamp-land district No. 341, and that it had since been altered and changed, and was therefore irrelevant and immaterial. And in this connection counsel offered to show that from August 25, 1882, until 1885, the record read as follows: “Swamp-land district No. 341. The report of the trustees of swamp-land district No. 341 was received and the following report adopted: ‘Ordered that J. M. Upham, J. M. Stephenson and John Miller, ’ ” etc. Then followed the balance of the order as above set out.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)