Boling v. City of Jackson, 46786
Decision Date | 21 February 1972 |
Docket Number | No. 46786,46786 |
Citation | 258 So.2d 443 |
Parties | L. D. BOLING and John Mohr v. CITY OF JACKSON, Mississippi, et al. |
Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Bacon & Smith, Jackson, W. E. McIntyre, Jr., Brandon, for appellants.
John E. Stone, E. D. Ingels, III, W. T. Neely, Valentine Surgis, Jackson, O. B. Triplett, Jr., Forest, for appellees.
More than two-thirds of the qualified electors residing in the territory East of Pearl River in Rankin County, Mississippi, petitioned the Chancery Court of Rankin County to create a municipal corporation to be known as 'Pearl, Mississippi'.
The City of Jackson, Mississippi, was made a party defendant in accordance with the requirements of Section 3374-04, Mississippi Code 1942 Annotated (1956). The City filed a special plea to the jurisdiction, averring that '(S) aid petition fails to set forth any municipal or public service which said municipal corporation proposes to render.' The City charged that because the petitioners failed to meet this mandatory requirement of the statute that the court did not have jurisdiction and the Petition to Incorporate should be dismissed.
Two individual protesters also filed a special plea to the jurisdiction which was identical to that filed by the City of Jackson.
The chancellor entered a decree sustaining the special plea to the jurisdiction and dismissing the Petition to Incorporate. The Court found in the decree:
'(T)hat the petition wholly fails to set forth any municipal and public services which the said municipal corporation proposes to render; . . .'
Section 3374-03, Mississippi Code 1942 Annotated (1956), lists eight requirements of the Petition for Incorporation. The sixth requirement is:
'It shall state the aims of the petitioners in seeking said incorporation, and shall set forth the municipal and public services which said municipal corporation proposes to render and the reasons why the public convenience and necessity would be served by the creation of such municipal corporation.'
In seeking to meet that requirement, petitioners stated in their petition:
'The Petitioners would further show that the Pearl area, because of its great number of people, as health problems created by inferior sewer systems, the keeping of animals in residential areas causing mosquitoes, and other diseases, and that due to the procedure which must be followed it is almost legally impossible to correct this situation without municipal ordinances, which the proposed municipality intends to enact.
'The Petitioners would show unto the Court that it intends to enact further ordinances which would allow the people to enjoy their homes and community, such as protection for electrical standards, plumbing standards and building code standards.
'It is further the purpose of the Petitioners that improved sanitation and garbage disposal within said territory be provided; that from time to time as occasion requires, adequate school facilities for the education of youth in said territory will be provided along with supervision of the youth of the area which is proposed to be incorporated.'
We think that the petition fully met the sixth requirement of the statute and that the chancellor was in...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
City of Jackson v. City of Pearl
... ... 1975). In another case relied on by Pearl, Flowood and Rankin ... County, Boling v. City of Jackson (In re Pearl), the ... Court referenced a prior version of Senate Bill 1995 stating ... that "the City of Jackson is ... ...
-
City of Pearl, In re
...Pearl. This is the third appearance of the case in this Court. City of Jackson v. Boling, 241 So.2d 359 (Miss.1970); Boling v. City of Jackson, 258 So.2d 443 (Miss.1972). Following the last remand to the trial court, a hearing was had on the merits and the chancellor dismissed the petition.......
- Delta Const. Co. of Jackson v. City of Pascagoula