Oliveira v. City of Milwaukee, 2001 WI 27, 242 Wis. 2d 1

624 N.W.2d 117 (2001) · Supreme Court of Wisconsin · April 3, 2001 · No. 98-2474

Summary

The Wisconsin Supreme Court reviewed whether Milwaukee was required to provide additional statutory and constitutional notice before considering duplicate zoning amendments referred to a different common council committee. The court held that the original properly published notices and hearing satisfied Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7)(d)2. and due process because the duplicate proposals were substantively identical and affected the same persons in the same manner. The court reversed the court of appeals and affirmed dismissal of the plaintiffs’ complaint.

Holdings

  1. Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7)(d)2. did not require a second class 2 notice and hearing because the duplicate zoning amendments were substantively identical to the original amendments and affected the same people in the same manner.
  2. The city did not violate constitutional due process by failing to publish additional notices for the duplicate zoning amendments.
  3. The alleged failure to follow the common council's internal committee-assignment procedures did not provide a basis for invalidating the zoning amendments.
  4. The City of Milwaukee was estopped from asserting that the plaintiffs' failure to comply with Wis. Stat. § 893.80(1)(b) barred the action.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether class 2 notices and a hearing on original zoning amendments were sufficient under Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7)(d)2. to permit enactment of substantively identical duplicate amendments referred to a different municipal committee without additional published notices.
  2. Whether due process required additional statutory notices because the duplicate amendments had different file numbers and were considered by a different committee.
  3. Whether the common council's alleged failure to follow its own committee-assignment procedures invalidated the zoning amendments.
  4. Whether the City of Milwaukee was estopped from asserting the plaintiffs' failure to comply with the statutory notice-of-claim requirement.

Disposition

reversed

Cases Cited (12)

  • Oliveira v. City of Milwaukee, 2000 WI App 49, 233 Wis. 2d 532, 608 N.W.2d 419(reversed)
  • Gillen v. City of Neenah, 219 Wis. 2d 806, 580 N.W.2d 628 (1998)(followed)
  • State v. Seymour, 24 Wis. 2d 258, 128 N.W.2d 680 (1964)(followed)
  • Fritsch v. St. Croix Central School District, 183 Wis. 2d 336, 515 N.W.2d 328 (Ct. App. 1994)(followed)
  • Herdeman v. City of Muskego, 116 Wis. 2d 687, 343 N.W.2d 814 (Ct. App. 1983)(followed)
  • Gloudeman v. City of St. Francis, 143 Wis. 2d 780, 422 N.W.2d 864 (Ct. App. 1988)(followed)
  • Anderson v. Judd, 404 P.2d 553 (Colo. 1965)(distinguished_from)
  • State ex rel. Kling v. Nielsen, 144 N.E.2d 278 (Ohio Ct. App. 1957)(distinguished_from)
  • Gricus v. Superintendent and Inspector of Buildings of Cambridge, 189 N.E.2d 209 (Mass. 1963)(distinguished_from)
  • State ex rel. La Follette v. Stitt, 114 Wis. 2d 358, 338 N.W.2d 684 (1983)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 12.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Download CaseDownload Case DataDownload Case and DataDownload AI Instructions

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from Wisconsin Supreme Court