Case Name: FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF WYANDOTTE v. BOARD OF STATE TAX COMMISSIONERS; EQUITABLE & CENTRAL TRUST CO. v. SAME
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1931-01-07
Citations: 253 Mich. 98
Docket Number: Calendar Nos. 35,144, 35,145
Parties: FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF WYANDOTTE v. BOARD OF STATE TAX COMMISSIONERS. EQUITABLE & CENTRAL TRUST CO. v. SAME.
Judges: Butzel, C. J., and Wiest, Clark, McDonald, North, and Fead, JJ., concurred. Potter, J., did not sit.
Reporter: Michigan Reports
Volume: 253
Pages: 98–99

Head Matter:
FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF WYANDOTTE v. BOARD OF STATE TAX COMMISSIONERS. EQUITABLE & CENTRAL TRUST CO. v. SAME.
These cases are controlled by First National Bank of Wyandotte v. Detroit Common Council, ante, 89.
Separate petitions. for mandamus by the First National Bank of Wyandotte, a national banking corporation, and others, and Equitable & Central Trust Company, a Michigan corporation, against the Board of State Tax Commissioners of the State of Michigan, to show cause why deductions from assessments should not be made for certain credits.
Submitted October 7, 1930.
(Calendar Nos. 35,144, 35,145.)
Writs denied January 7, 1931.
Stevenson, Butzel, Eaman & Long (Thomas G. Long, of counsel), for plaintiffs.
Wilber M. Brucker, Attorney-General, and Paul G. Eger and Charles Rubiner, Assistants Attorney General, for defendant.
Meredith P. Sawyer, amicus curiæ.

Opinion:
Sharpe, J.
These cases involve the same assessments under consideration in motions Nos. 171 and 172 (First National Bank of Wyandotte v. Common Council, ante, 89, and Equitable & Central Trust Co. v. Common Council, ante, 97, respectively), in which opinions are handed down herewith.
After confirmation of the assessment rolls by the common council, review was had by the defendant commission under the provisions of section 4151, 1 Comp. Laws 1915, and the assessment as made was confirmed. Mandamus is here asked to compel the defendant board to grant the same relief sought by the plaintiffs in those cases. An answer has been filed to the order to show cause, in which the board insists that the assessment as made was in conformity with the statute.
For the reason stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Clark, the writs- are denied.
Butzel, C. J., and Wiest, Clark, McDonald, North, and Fead, JJ., concurred. Potter, J., did not sit.