City of Pueblo v. Stanton
| Citation | 45 Colo. 523,102 P. 512 |
| Parties | CITY OF PUEBLO et al. v. STANTON et al. |
| Decision Date | 03 May 1909 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Colorado |
Appeal from District Court, Pueblo County; W. Walter Dixon, Judge.
Suit by I. W. Stanton and others against the City of Pueblo and others. From a decree for complainants, defendants appeal. Affirmed.
Jas. A Park, City Atty., D. A. Highberger, City Atty., and Robert E Gast, for appellants.
Hartman & Ballreich, for appellees.
Before the final passage of an ordinance of the city of Pueblo, but after it had reached such a stage in its passage that the proposed ordinance was published in a newspaper of the city the owners of a certain tract of land sought to be annexed to the city by the proposed ordinance secured, after notice and hearing, a temporary writ of injunction restraining the city authorities from proceeding further in the passage and adoption of the ordinance, and, upon the final hearing thereof, the said temporary writ was made permanent. The facts necessary for a determination of the question involved are as follows: A tract of land, known as the 'Stanton and Chilcott tract,' lies in what may be termed the heart of the city of Pueblo, but it has never been platted into lots and blocks, and the city has not, by ordinance or otherwise, defined the boundaries of the city so as to include this tract within the boundaries; that is, the tract is not surrounded by the boundary lines of the city. The purpose of the ordinance was to annex this tract to the city. The accompanying plat, filed with appellant's brief shows the tract in question and lands adjacent, and is sufficiently accurate for the purposes of a discussion of the questions presented.
The land lying north of this tract and designated on the plat as 'Park Property' is owned by the city, and was acquired by the city for park purposes; but no act of the city expressly annexing the property has been taken. The property at the time it was acquired was without the limits of the city. One of the witnesses connected with the city engineer's office of the city testified that the boundary lines of the city extended from a point east of the Stanton and Chilcott tract to the northeast corner thereof, and extended thence in a northerly direction by an unbroken line to the northern boundary of the city, which is a mile or more distant from the property in question. He stated on cross-examination that his reason for extending the line of the boundary from the northeast quarter of the Stanton and Chilcott tract north was the fact that the city was the owner of the property on the north. If the boundary line of the city extends northward from the northeast corner of the Stanton and Chilcott tract, then the tract is surrounded by the boundary lines of the city. If the boundary line extends southward from the northeast corner of the tract, then the tract is not surrounded by the boundary lines of the city. So much of section 4389a, 3 Mills' Ann. St. Rev. Supp., as is pertinent to the question, is as follows: 'That whenever any tract or tracts of land adjoining to any city of the first class, but not embraced within the limits of any municipal corporation, shall have by its owners been laid out...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Boise City v. Boise City Development Co., Ltd.
...50 Kan. 573, 32 P. 913; Brown v. Silverton, 97 Ore. 441, 190 P. 971; Sharkey v. Butte, 52 Mont. 16, 155 P. 266; Pueblo v. Stanton, 45 Colo. 523, 102 P. 512.) When a power arises from the occurring of facts extraneous to the official actions of city officers, the power is not presumed, but t......
-
Red River Valley Brick Co. v. City of Grand Forks
...proceedings annexing territory by injunction against the collection of taxes on their property by the city. It is held in Pueblo v. Stanton, 45 Colo. 523, 102 P. 512, that proceedings for the annexation of territory, the corporate authority, will be enjoined at the suit of the property owne......
-
City and County of Denver v. Holmes
...power to determine the conditions and requirements under which annexation of territory to a municipality may be had. Pueblo v. Stanton, 45 Colo. 523, 102 P. 512. Courts may not expand, abridge, or revise these conditions and requirements. City of Pass Christian v. Town of Long Beach, 157 Mi......
-
Red River Valley Brick Co. v. City of Grand Forks
...of the proceedings, and not to the policy of annexation; hence this point cannot be sustained. See, also, City of Pueblo et al. v. Stanton et al., 45 Colo. 523, 102 Pac. 512. [3] 2. The next point made by appellant is that questions for determination in this action are not proper subjects f......