Brock v. City of Decatur

• Decision Date: 27 November 1913
• Parties: BROCK v. CITY OF DECATUR et al.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

64 So. 73

185 Ala. 146

BROCK v. CITY OF DECATUR et al.

Supreme Court of Alabama

November 27, 1913

Appeal from Law and Equity Court, Morgan County; Thomas W. Wert Judge.

Bill by John L. Brock against the City of Decatur and W.R. Spright and Joseph H. Calvin, contractors, to ascertain and decree the correct amount of benefits or Increased value accruing to complainants' real estate by reason of certain improvements carried out by the city of Decatur, and that said amount be declared a lien upon the same, and to enjoin and restrain the city, or its officers or agents, from asserting or attempting to assert, or claim any title or claim whatsoever under and by virtue of any assessment made and levied by the city of Decatur against said property, and for general relief. From a decree sustaining demurrers to the bill, complainant appeals. Affirmed.

The bill sets up ordinances adopted by the city, providing for street improvements in the laying of bitulithic pavement and curbing, and the letting of the contract under the ordinances, and the improvements under color of the contract after long delay, and the assessment by the mayor and board of aldermen, fixing the amount that each piece of property should pay, and a demand by the clerk of the board for the payment of the same, and that said assessments constitute a cloud on the title of orator's property. It is further averred that the improvements were not completed within the time covered by the contract, that the streets were badly torn up, and that orator and his interests were greatly damaged by the long delay in the completion of the streets and the obstructions created thereby. It is further alleged that the assessments made and levied are grossly and greatly in excess of any and all benefits accruing to said property by reason of said improvement, and that the improvement did not constitute more than 50 per cent. of the amount so assessed. The bill then sets out the various assessments of property. The bill avers a willingness and readiness to pay and just and proper amount which the city is entitled to. The demurrers take the points discussed in the opinion.

E.W Godbey, of Decatur, for appellant.

Callahan & Harris, of Decatur, for appellee.

SOMERVILLE J.

The only question presented by the appeal is whether a final assessment for a municipal improvement, made under the provisions of the Code 1907, §§ 1359-1420, may be collaterally attacked...