Bates v. Comstock Realty Co.
Decision Date | 08 October 1924 |
Docket Number | No. 24317,24317 |
Parties | BATES v. COMSTOCK REALTY CO. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; Robert W. Hall, Judge.
Action by Charles W. Bates against the Comstock Realty Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.
H. A. Loevy and Albert Chandler, both of St. Louis, for appellant.
Bates, Williams & Baron, of St. Louis, for respondent.
This is a suit on two special tax bills issued and delivered to the Carter Construction Company by the city of St. Louis, evidencing assessments made against property of defendant for the payment in part of the cost of construction of what is known as the Mill Creek joint district sewer.
The improvement was made, and tax bills issued to pay for it, pursuant to three ordinances approved July 3, 1914. The first established a joint sewer district, to be known as "Mill Creek joint sewer district." The second and third authorized and directed the board of public improvements to let contracts for the construction respectively of the first and second sections of a Mill Creek joint district sewer, in accordance with the plans and specifications on file in its office.
The boundaries of the Mill Creek joint sewer district as established by the ordinance are substantially coterminous with those of the natural watershed known as the Mill Creek valley, which extends westwardly from the Mississippi river, and comprises a territory of approximately 5,122 acres. For many years prior to the construction of the joint district sewer giving rise to the present controversy this area was drained by a system of sewers consisting of a main sewer, the "Mill Creek sewer," extending in a westerly direction from the Mississippi river a distance of 3½ miles, and laterals which came into it from both the north and the south. At the time of the passage of the ordinances just referred to these sewers were entirely adequate for the carrying off of the sanitary sewage which flowed into them during dry weather, but during heavy rains the main sewer became overcharged, and the water flowed out through the manholes and backed up through the laterals and flooded basements in territory on both the north and the south sides of it. The joint district sewer was designed to relieve this condition, and was so constructed as to become an auxiliary of the main sewer during the times in which storm water is seeking an outlet.
The new Mill Creek joint district sewer lies immediately south of the old Mill Creek sewer and parallels it, but has no direct connection with it. Nor does the new sewer communicate directly with any of the laterals on the north side of the old one. But it does receive the water flowing through the laterals on the south side after it reaches a certain volume. By reason of this connection the new sewer carries approximately one-half of the flood water that formerly sought outlet through the old one in times of heavy rains. The new sewer is of concrete construction, built in the shape of a horseshoe, and having dimensions of 16½ feet both horizontally and vertically. From the river for a distance of 1,990 feet it was constructed in an open cut; the remainder of it was tunneled through rock. For the purpose of construction it was divided into two sections and a separate contract was let for each. The Carter Construction Company was awarded both, however. Under these contracts the work and material were classified and were to be paid for by the quantity. The bids were based on a "unit price" which was defined to mean "the price * * * of the separate, articles of material in place and the labor necessary to render a complete sewer according to the plans and specifications." According to the bids and estimates the first section was to cost $1,399,924.20 and the second section, $1,672,532.
The second section of the sewer was completed and accepted by the city in April, 1916, and the first section in May, 1916. Computations of the cost, alleged to be in conformity with the terms of the contracts, were made under the supervision of the president of the board of public service. According to such computations the cost of the first section was $1,673,611.80, and that of the second section $1,760,038.22. These two sums were each levied and assessed by the board of public service as a special tax ratably by area on all lots or parcels of ground within the joint sewer district, excluding public highways, as provided by the charter then in force. Based on these assessments, tax bills were issued. They were signed as follows:
The two tax bills in suit are for the assessments made against defendant's property for its proportion of the cost of the two sections of the sewer respectively. Plaintiff is the assignee and holder. Other facts having an immediate bearing on the questions presented for decision will be stated in connection with their consideration. The petition is in two counts, one for each tax bill, and is conventional. The answer is quite long. A synopsis of it was made by defendant's counsel in their principal brief as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State ex rel. Gentry v. Becker, 38447.
... ... Reynold, 317 Mo. 484, 297 S.W. 374; Hickox v. McKinley, 311 Mo. 234, 278 S.W. 671; Bates v. Comstock Realty Co., 306 Mo. 312, 267 S.W. 641; State ex inf. Major v. Arkansas Lbr. Co., 260 ... ...
-
Spitcaufsky v. Hatten
... ... BUCHANAN; THE MUNICIPAL BOND CORPORATION; HEIM & OVERLY REALTY COMPANY, a Corporation for Themselves and Others Similarly Situated Who May Intervene Herein and ... Tonnar, 28 S.W. (2d) 443; Schwab v. St. Louis, 310 Mo. 116, 274 S.W. 1058; Bates v. Comstock Realty Co., 306 Mo. 312, 267 S.W. 641; Winona & St. Peter Land Co. v. Minnesota, 159 ... ...
-
Kansas City v. J. I. Case Threshing Mach. Co.
... ... Ry. Co., 178 S.W. 182; State ex rel ... v. St. Louis, 117 Mo. 1, 22 S.W. 910; Bates v ... Comstock Realty Co., 267 S.W. 641; Fanchor v. Board ... of Commrs., 210 P. 241. (4) All ... ...
- Haeussler Investment Company v. Bates