Board of Commissioners of Wells County v. Fahlor
Citation | 31 N.E. 1112,132 Ind. 426 |
Decision Date | 12 October 1892 |
Docket Number | 13,050 |
Parties | The Board of Commissioners of Wells County et al. v. Fahlor |
Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
From the Wells Circuit Court.
Judgment affirmed.
J. S. Daily, L. Mock, L. B. Simmons, E. R. Wilson and J. J. Todd, for appellants.
N. Burwell, for appellee.
This case is in this court for the second time. Fahlor v. Board, etc., 101 Ind. 167. A branch of the subject-matter of this controversy, exhibiting some of the facts and questions contained in the record now before us was considered in Johnson v. Board, etc., 107 Ind. 15, 8 N.E. 1. The cases to which we have referred lay down two leading rules which govern this case.
First. Notice is essential to confer jurisdiction in proceedings for the establishment of a public road, where an adjacent owner's land is sought to be subjected to a special assessment.
Second. Where judicial proceedings are void because of an entire absence of notice to a property owner, a subsequent statute assuming to validate such proceedings is invalid.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Horton v. Carter, 8 Div. 528
... ... proceedings in the probate court of Marshall County to have certain real property set aside to her as a ... 324; Pryor v. Downey, 50 Cal. 388, 19 Am.Rep. 656; Board of Comm. of Wells County v. Fahlor, 132 Ind. 426, 31 N.E ... ...
-
John Goodrich v. City of Detroit
...A number of cases are cited which, it is argued, give countenance to this position. Paul v. Detroit, 32 Mich. 108; Wells County v. Fahlor, 132 Ind. 426, 31 N. E. 1112; State v. Fond du Lac, 42 Wis. 287; Stuart v. Palmer, 74 N. Y. 183, 30 Am. Rep. 289; Scott v. Toledo, 1 L. R. A. 688, 36 Fed......
- the National Bank of Battle Creek, Michigan v. Lock