City of Hartselle v. Culver
| Decision Date | 30 June 1927 |
| Docket Number | 8 Div. 873 |
| Citation | 216 Ala. 668,114 So. 58 |
| Parties | CITY OF HARTSELLE v. CULVER. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Rehearing Denied Oct. 27, 1927
Appeal from Circuit Court, Morgan County; O. Kyle, Judge.
J.R Culver appeals from an assessment for street improvements levied by the City of Hartselle. From a judgment granting Culver's motion to quash the assessment, and denying the motion of the city to render judgment for the amount properly chargeable against the property, the City of Hartselle appeals. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
Sample & Kilpatrick, of Hartsells, for appellant.
A.J Harris, of Decatur, for appellee.
In support of the action of the trial court in quashing and annulling the assessment for street improvement--a macadamized roadway--made by the city council of Hartselle against the abutting property of appellee, counsel for appellee contend that the municipal proceedings were fatally defective in four particulars: (1) In confirming the preliminary resolution and ordaining the improvement before the selection of the character of the improvement--that is whether it should be of water-bound macadam or of slag: (2) in failing to make any preliminary estimate of the cost of the improvement; (3) in failing to prepare and file plans and specifications of the work that were sufficiently definite and informatory; and (4) in failing to pass a grade ordinance before the improvement was finally ordered, or at any other time.
1. In cases recently before this court it has been several times held that, in preliminary improvement ordinances of this character, several different kinds of paving material might be specified in the alternative, as the material to be used, from which a selection would be seasonably made; particularly where the materials named are of the same general nature. Sanders v. City of Troy, 211 Ala. 331, 100 So. 483; Stovall v. City of Jasper, 215 Ala. 300, 110 So. 317. This is now, in fact, expressly provided for by section 2180 of the Code. In this respect the ordinance here presented was clearly unobjectionable.
2. A preliminary estimate of the cost of the projected improvements, along with other details, must be made and filed in due season for the inspection and information of property owners, before finally ordering the improvements. Code, §§ 2176, 2177. The only estimate that appears to have been made in this case was a declaration, incorporated in the preliminary ordinance, that the cost of this particular improvement on Mynatt street, along with two other roadway improvements, and concrete sidewalk improvements on 10 other separate streets, amounted in gross to $15,100.
In order to serve the purpose of the statute, and to inform property owners approximately of the burden to be imposed on their property, an estimate should be made and filed showing the cost of each separate unit of the contemplated improvements, and where different materials, in the alternative, are suggested for use in the proposed construction, the estimate ought to be for each of those materials. Anything short of this would be practically valueless, as indicated by the record in this case, showing that the cost of the macadam paving was $3.28 per cubic yard, while the cost of slag and cinders was only $2.
We conclude that there was no estimate here of the cost...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of Jasper v. Sanders
... ... rights of third persons having intervened. Wise v ... Miller, 215 Ala. 660, 111 So. 913; City of Hartselle ... v. Culver, 216 Ala. 668, 671, 114 So. 58; Hood v ... City of Bessemer, 213 Ala. 225, 104 So. 325; Grant ... v. City of Birmingham, 210 Ala ... ...
-
Stovall v. City of Jasper
...in statutory compliance, for making such assessment, were recounted in Hood v. City of Bessemer, 213 Ala. 225, 104 So. 325, and City of Hartselle v. Culver, supra. And the assessment is made final (section 2199 [section 1384] Code), in a case where no fraud is duly pleaded and shown, the de......
-
Hamrick v. Town of Albertville
...pertaining to such ascertainment of fact, and judgment rendered. Sections 2193, 2197, Code; Stovall v. City of Jasper, supra; City of Hartselle v. Culver, supra. The adjournments, if taken in open court, bound the defendant, since he had received the required original notice and was in cour......
-
Walton v. City of Mobile, 1 Div. 865
... ... present fundamental or jurisdictional objections, as well as ... objections going to the regularity of the proceeding ... City of Hartselle v. Culver, 216 Ala. 668, 114 So ... 58; Nashville, C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Town of Boaz et ... al., 229 Ala. 155, 155 So. 536 ... He may ... ...