Anglemyer v. Bd. of Com'rs of Huntington Cnty.

• Decision Date: 10 October 1899
• Citation: 54 N.E. 803,153 Ind. 217
• Parties: ANGLEMYER et al. v. BOARD OF COM'RS OF HUNTINGTON COUNTY.
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

153 Ind. 217

54 N.E. 803

ANGLEMYER et al.

v.BOARD OF COM'RS OF HUNTINGTON COUNTY.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

Oct. 10, 1899.

Appeal from circuit court, Huntington county; Robert Lowry, Special Judge.

Proceedings by the board of commissioners of Huntington county to reassess lands benefited by the construction of a free gravel road. There was a judgment for the commissioners, and George Anglemyer and others, remonstrators, appeal. Affirmed.B. M. Cobb, for appellants. Whitelock & Cook, for appellee.

JORDAN, C. J.

This was a proceeding instituted before the board of commissioners of the county of Huntington to reassess lands of appellants benefited by the construction of a free gravel road known as the “Roanoke and Jackson Gravel Road.” Proceedings to construct this highway were commenced in 1883, under the act of 1877 (sections 6855, 6856, Burns' Rev. St. 1894; sections 5091, 5092, Horner's Rev. St.). It appears that said road was constructed, and bonds issued and sold by the county under the provisions of the statute in order to raise money to pay the costs and expenses arising out of the improvement. It is further disclosed that the original assessment made upon the lands benefited proved to be insufficient to pay all the expenses and costs incurred in and about the construction of the highway, and the deficit rendered it necessary to institute this action for a reassessment of the lands in question. Appellants appeared before the board of commissioners in pursuance of the notice given, and remonstrated against the additional assessment of benefits upon their lands; and such proceedings were had before the board as resulted in the appointment of reviewers to make additional assessment, which was accordingly made, and said assessment was approved and confirmed by the board; from which order the remonstrators appealed to the circuit court. In the latter court an amended remonstrance was filed. Certain paragraphs of this remonstrance were stricken out on motion, and the ruling of the court in rejecting these paragraphs is assigned as error. On the trial the court made a special finding of facts, and stated its conclusions of law thereon. Over appellants' joint exceptions to these conclusions of law, and over their motion for a new trial, judgment was rendered upon the finding. Appellants unsuccessfully moved to modify the judgment, and have assigned error upon this ruling of the court. Counsel for appellee, in an additional brief, filed...