Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
13 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1979–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Wisconsin courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Deutsches Land, Inc. v. City of Glendalegreen2 sentences2012Second, the City cites case law, namely Deutsches Land, Inc. v. City of Glendale, 225 Wis. 2d 70 , 591 N.W.2d 583 (1999), and University of Wisconsin Medical Foundation, Inc. v. City of Madison, 2003 WI App 204 , 267 Wis. 2d 504 , 671 N.W.2d 292 , indicating that organizations must show benevolence to qualify for an exemption under Wis. Stat. § 70.11 (4). 2012Second, the City cites case law, namely Deutsches Land, Inc. v. City of Glendale, 225 Wis. 2d 70 , 591 N.W.2d 583 (1999), and University of Wisconsin Medical Foundation, Inc. v. City of Madison, 2003 WI App 204 , 267 Wis. 2d 504 , 671 N.W.2d 292 , indicating that organizations must show benevolence to qualify for an exemption under Wis. Stat. § 70.11 (4). | 1 | 4 |
Milwaukee Protestant Home for the Aged v. City of Milwaukeegreen2 sentences2012This case law interprets the phrase "benevolent associations," and holds that entities must show benevolent use to qualify for the exemption as benevolent associations. "[The supreme court has] on prior occasions stated that, to qualify for a total exemption under Wis. Stat. § 70.11 (4), an organization must show three facts: (1) that it is a benevolent organization, (2) that it owns and exclusively uses the property, and (3) that it uses the property for exempt purposes." Deutsches Land, 225 Wis. 2d at 81 -82 (citing Milwaukee Protestant, 41 Wis. 2d at 293 ). 1999See Milwaukee Protestant Home v. City of Milwaukee, 41 Wis. 2d 284, 293 , 164 N.W.2d 289 (1969). | 1 | 2 |
Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation v. Town of Wyominggreen2 sentences2003In fact, the legislature has chosen to exclude from exemption under § 70.11 (4m) (a) (applicable to nonprofit hospitals) any "property used for commercial purposes ... [such] as a doctor's office." 9 Although the Foundation notes that its bylaws require it to provide medical care to patients "without regard to ... ability to pay for services," Wisconsin courts have long held that " 'a corporation's declared objects are not controlling in determining whether its property is exempt.1" Frank Lloyd Wright Found, v. Town of Wyoming, 267 Wis. 599, 605 , 66 N.W.2d 642 (1954) (citation omitted). 2003In fact, the legislature has chosen to exclude from exemption under § 70.11 (4m) (a) (applicable to nonprofit hospitals) any "property used for commercial purposes ... [such] as a doctor's office." 9 Although the Foundation notes that its bylaws require it to provide medical care to patients "without regard to ... ability to pay for services," Wisconsin courts have long held that " 'a corporation's declared objects are not controlling in determining whether its property is exempt.1" Frank Lloyd Wright Found, v. Town of Wyoming, 267 Wis. 599, 605 , 66 N.W.2d 642 (1954) (citation omitted). | 1 | 2 |
State ex rel. State Ass'n of Y. M. C. A. v. Richardsongreen2 sentences1999See Richardson, 197 Wis. at 392 ; Green Bay & Mississippi Canal Co., 76 Wis. at 591 . 1999See Richardson, 197 Wis. at 392 ; Green Bay & Mississippi Canal Co., 76 Wis. at 591 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Janesville Community Day Care Center, Inc. v. Spoden
green
2 sentences2007Janesville Cmty. Day Care, 126 Wis.2d at 235 , 376 N.W.2d 78 . ¶ 70 To qualify as an educational association under Wis. Stat. § 70.11 (4), MRMC must pass a two-part test. 2007Janesville Cmty. Day Care, 126 Wis. 2d at 235 . ¶ 70. | 3 | 1995–2007 |
Midtown Church of Christ, Inc. v. City of Racine
green
2 sentences2009Midtown, 83 Wis. 2d at 75 . ¶ 15. 1979The scope of the exemption provided in this section was recently reviewed by this court in Midtown Church of Christ v. City of Racine, 83 Wis.2d 72, 74-76 , 264 N.W.2d 281 (1978). | 2 | 1979–2009 |
Friendship Village of Greater Milwaukee, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee
green
2 sentences1995Finally, "the burden of proving an entitlement to a tax exemption is on the party seeking the exemption." Friendship I, 181 Wis. 2d at 219 , 511 N.W.2d at 350 . [3, 4] To qualify for property tax exemption under § 70.11(4), STATS., a taxpayer must satisfy five criteria. 1995Finally, "the burden of proving an entitlement to a tax exemption is on the party seeking the exemption." Friendship I, 181 Wis. 2d at 219 , 511 N.W.2d at 350 . [3, 4] To qualify for property tax exemption under § 70.11(4), STATS., a taxpayer must satisfy five criteria. | 2 | 1995–2004 |
Sisters of Saint Mary v. City of Madison
green
2 sentences2004Mary, 89 Wis. 2d 372 , the supreme court concluded, without discussing alternatives, that a hospital-owned residence, located near the hospital and occupied by the hospital's chaplain, qualified for an exemption under Wis. Stat. § 70.11 (4m). 2003Similarly, in Sisters of Saint Mary v. City of Madison, 89 Wis. 2d 372 , 278 N.W.2d 814 (1979), the court held that a single family residence that a nonprofit hospital owned and provided to its chaplain qualified for an exemption under § 70.11 (4m) because it was reasonably necessary *516 for the hospital to have a priest located near the hospital to serve the spiritual needs of its patients and staff. | 2 | 2003–2004 |
Madison Particular Council v. Dane County
green
1 sentence2020Vincent De Paul Soc., 246 Wis. at 209-10 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
University of Wisconsin Medical Foundation, Inc. v. City of Madison
green
2 sentences2012Second, the City cites case law, namely Deutsches Land, Inc. v. City of Glendale, 225 Wis. 2d 70 , 591 N.W.2d 583 (1999), and University of Wisconsin Medical Foundation, Inc. v. City of Madison, 2003 WI App 204 , 267 Wis. 2d 504 , 671 N.W.2d 292 , indicating that organizations must show benevolence to qualify for an exemption under Wis. Stat. § 70.11 (4). 2012Second, the City cites case law, namely Deutsches Land, Inc. v. City of Glendale, 225 Wis. 2d 70 , 591 N.W.2d 583 (1999), and University of Wisconsin Medical Foundation, Inc. v. City of Madison, 2003 WI App 204 , 267 Wis. 2d 504 , 671 N.W.2d 292 , indicating that organizations must show benevolence to qualify for an exemption under Wis. Stat. § 70.11 (4). | 1 | 2012–2012 |
City of Franklin v. Crystal Ridge, Inc.
green
2 sentences2007City of Franklin v. Crystal Ridge, Inc., 180 Wis.2d 561, 565 , 509 N.W.2d 730 (1994). 2007City of Franklin v. Crystal Ridge, Inc., 180 Wis.2d 561, 565 , 509 N.W.2d 730 (1994). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Mitchell Aero, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee
green
2 sentences2007Mitchell Aero, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee, 42 Wis.2d 656, 663 , 168 N.W.2d 183 (1969). [11] Wisconsin Stat. § 70.11(1) provides a property tax exemption for state-owned property that is similar to the § 70.11(2) tax exemption for property owned by a municipality. [12] Crystal Ridge Ski Hill is the name of the downhill facility. 2007Mitchell Aero, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee, 42 Wis.2d 656, 663 , 168 N.W.2d 183 (1969). [11] Wisconsin Stat. § 70.11(1) provides a property tax exemption for state-owned property that is similar to the § 70.11(2) tax exemption for property owned by a municipality. [12] Crystal Ridge Ski Hill is the name of the downhill facility. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Family Hospital Nursing Home, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee
green
2 sentences2004However, we agree with the Hospital that the authority the City relies on, Family Hospital Nursing Home, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee, 78 Wis. 2d 312 , 254 N.W.2d 268 (1977), and Friendship Village of Greater Milwaukee, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee, 181 Wis. 2d 207 , 511 N.W.2d 345 (Ct. App. 1993), falls short of stating this proposition. 2004However, we agree with the Hospital that the authority the City relies on, Family Hospital Nursing Home, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee, 78 Wis. 2d 312 , 254 N.W.2d 268 (1977), and Friendship Village of Greater Milwaukee, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee, 181 Wis. 2d 207 , 511 N.W.2d 345 (Ct. App. 1993), falls short of stating this proposition. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
St. Luke's Hospital Ass'n v. City of Milwaukee
green
2 sentences2003The court held in Columbia Hospital Ass'n, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee, 35 Wis. 2d 660 , 151 N.W.2d 750 (1967), that residential property a nonprofit hospital owned and rented to medical personnel qualified for an exemption under § 70.11 (4m) because it was reasonably necessary for the hospital to offer conveniently located and inexpensive rental property to certain members of its medical staff. 2003The court held in Columbia Hospital Ass'n, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee, 35 Wis. 2d 660 , 151 N.W.2d 750 (1967), that residential property a nonprofit hospital owned and rented to medical personnel qualified for an exemption under § 70.11 (4m) because it was reasonably necessary for the hospital to offer conveniently located and inexpensive rental property to certain members of its medical staff. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Ladish Malting Co. v. Wisconsin Department of Revenue
green
2 sentences2002In Landish Malting Co. v. DOR, 98 Wis. 2d 496, 498 , 297 N.W.2d 56 (Ct. App. 1980), the supreme court read Wis. Stat. § 70.11 (27) as allowing an exemption for business machinery used in manufacturing tangible personal property. 2002In Landish Malting Co. v. DOR, 98 Wis. 2d 496, 498 , 297 N.W.2d 56 (Ct. App. 1980), the supreme court read Wis. Stat. § 70.11 (27) as allowing an exemption for business machinery used in manufacturing tangible personal property. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Green Bay & Mississippi Canal Co. v. Outagamie County
green
2 sentences1999See Richardson, 197 Wis. at 392 ; Green Bay & Mississippi Canal Co., 76 Wis. at 591 . 1999See Richardson, 197 Wis. at 392 ; Green Bay & Mississippi Canal Co., 76 Wis. at 591 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Gymnastic Ass'n of the South Side of Milwaukee v. City of Milwaukee
green
2 sentences1999We will assume, without deciding, that such activity is covered by Wis. Stat. § 70.11 (4). [6] At the time we decided Gymnastic Association of the South Side of Milwaukee v. City of Milwaukee, 129 Wis. 429 , 109 N.W. 109 (1906), the statute did not contain a partial exemption provision: the property was either completely exempt or completely taxed. 1999We will assume, without deciding, that such activity is covered by Wis. Stat. § 70.11 (4). [6] At the time we decided Gymnastic Association of the South Side of Milwaukee v. City of Milwaukee, 129 Wis. 429 , 109 N.W. 109 (1906), the statute did not contain a partial exemption provision: the property was either completely exempt or completely taxed. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.