Blake v. Quivey
| Decision Date | 19 January 1888 |
| Docket Number | 13,046 |
| Parties | Blake v. Quivey et al |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
From the Marshall Circuit Court.
Judgment reversed, with costs.
A. C Capron and P. O. Jones, for appellant.
J. D McLaren and E. C. Martindale, for appellees.
As will appear by referring to the facts as more fully stated upon a former appeal of this cause--Munson v. Blake, 101 Ind. 78--the proceedings in the court below were had upon a petition filed in the Marshall Circuit Court for the location and construction of a drain. After the petition had been duly referred to the commissioners of drainage, and after the commissioners had made a report, favorable to the construction of the drain, and of the assessment of lands supposed to be benefited, with the cost thereof, Stephen Munson appeared and presented his application for leave to file a remonstrance against the confirmation of the report. He stated, in his verified application, that the commissioners of drainage had been ordered to report on the first day of the December term, 1881; that he had prepared his remonstrance and appeared in court at the appointed time, and the three succeeding days thereafter, during all of which time he was ready to file a remonstrance against the report in the event his land should be assessed with benefits. The commissioners of drainage did not make their report until the twenty-seventh day of the December term, at which time they reported, with other assessments, an assessment against the land of Munson, to the amount of $ 200. Munson challenged the report in respect to the amount of benefits assessed therein against his land, and he also alleged in the remonstrance which he proposed to file, that the drain recommended in the report would not be of public utility, etc. The court below refused to permit the remonstrance to be filed, presumably upon the ground that it had not been presented within the time fixed by the statute.
It was held on the former appeal, that Munson, having been prevented by the unauthorized delay of the commissioners from filing his remonstrance at an earlier period, the court erred in not permitting him to file it upon the application and showing made after the time limited therefor.
After the case was returned to the court below and redocketed Munson, instead of filing the remonstrance which he had been refused permission to file before, moved the court to strike out the report of the commissioners of drainage, on the ground that...
To continue reading
Request your trial