Armstrong v. City of Montgomery

Decision Date17 February 1949
Docket Number3 Div. 509.
PartiesARMSTRONG et al. v. CITY OF MONTGOMERY.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Robt. E. Coburn, Jr., of Montgomery, for appellants.

R S. Hill, Jr. and Walter J. Knabe, both of Montgomery, for appellee.

BROWN Justice.

Appeal in this case is from a declaratory decree rendered by the circuit court, in equity, upholding the constitutionality of § 595, Title 62, Code of 1940, relating to the Cities of Mobile and Montgomery. Subsection (2) thereof provides 'Each such city shall have the same power with reference to the construction or reconstruction of sanitary sewer systems and sewage treatment or disposal plants and the construction or reconstruction of outlets for such sewer systems within the police jurisdiction of such city as it has within the corporate limits of such city.'

Subsection (3), § 595, Tit. 62, Code of 1940 provides: 'Each such city shall have the same power with respect to the assessment of the cost of any such construction or reconstruction against the property abutting upon or served or benefited or increased in value by reason of such construction or reconstruction where such property is located outside of the corporate limits of such city and within the police jurisdiction of such city, as it has under existing law with respect to assessments against property located within the corporate limits of such city and served, benefited or increased in value by reason of such construction or reconstruction, and shall have the same power to issue bonds or negotiable notes to pay for such construction or reconstruction, as it has under law where such assessment is made against property located within the corporate limits of such city. All laws governing or relating to such assessments against property located within the corporate limits shall apply to such assessments made against property outside of the corporate limits and within the police jurisdiction of such city. All laws relating to the issuance of bonds to obtain money to pay for the cost of such construction or reconstruction, where the whole or any part of such cost is assessed against property located within the corporate limits of the city shall apply and govern the issuance and sale of bonds to obtain money to pay for cost of such construction or reconstruction, where such cost is assessed in whole or in part against property located outside of the corporate limits of such city and within the police jurisdiction of such city.'

To fully understand the scope and purpose of said section it must be read in connection with § 601, Title 37, Code of 1940, which provides: 'All cities and towns may make all needful provisions for the drainage of such city or town; may construct and maintain efficient sanitary and storm-water sewers, or sewer systems, either within or without the corporate limits of the city or town; may construct and maintain ditches, surface drains, aqueducts, and canals build and construct underground sewers through private or public property, either within or without the corporate limits of such city or town, but just compensation must first be made for the private property taken, injured, or destroyed.'

Section 513, Title 37, Code of 1940, dealing generally with powers conferred by the legislature on municipalities in subsection 2 provides: 'The construction...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Mayor of Ocean Springs v. Homebldrs. Ass'n
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • June 15, 2006
    ...must be expressly conferred by statute and when so conferred include necessary incidental powers." Armstrong v. City of Montgomery, 251 Ala. 632, 38 So.2d 862, 863 (1949). ¶ 53. The Iowa and Alabama decisions comport with holdings of our federal courts interpreting Mississippi law in a seri......
  • Opinion of the Justices, In re, 155
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • June 20, 1956
    ...in which they were asked, as follows: (1) a. No. b. No. c. No. d. No. These answers are based on the holding in Armstrong v. City of Montgomery, 251 Ala. 632, 38 So.2d 862. (2) No. Schultes v. Eberly, 82 Ala. 242, 2 So. 345; Bradley v. State ex rel. Rockwell, 210 Ala. 166, 97 So. 543; Colli......
  • Water Works and Sanitary Sewer Bd. of Montgomery v. Sullivan, 3 Div. 664
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • November 5, 1953
    ...power to make such assessment is a taxing power of the legislature conferred on the city by legislative enactment. Armstrong v. City of Montgomery, 251 Ala. 632, 38 So.2d 862; Sections 308, 601 to 646, Title 37, But since the assessment of the cost to property specially benefited is an exer......
  • Oliver v. Water Works and Sanitary Sewer Bd.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • May 27, 1954
    ...in the nature of a tax and it was a special use of the taxing power of the city by legislative enactment, citing Armstrong v. City of Montgomery, 251 Ala. 632, 38 So.2d 862; sections 308, 601 to 646, Title 37, Code. We therefore referred to our case of Mitchell v. City of Mobile, 244 Ala. 4......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT