City of St. Louis v. Ranken

• Decision Date: 21 May 1888
• Citation: 95 Mo. 189,8 S.W. 249
• Parties: CITY OF ST. LOUIS v. RANKEN et al.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

8 S.W. 249

95 Mo. 189

CITY OF ST. LOUIS v. RANKEN et al.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

May 21, 1888.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS — ACTION FOR ASSESSMENTS — EXPERT TESTIMONY.

In an action by the city to recover of a property holder the amount which his property has been benefited by the widening of a street, a charge for plaintiff that, in determining the amount, the testimony of experts, if deemed unreasonable, may be disregarded, is not error.

Appeal from St. Louis circuit court; GEORGE W. LUBKE, Judge.

Action by the city of St. Louis against Thomas Ranken, Jr., and others, to recover the amount which defendants have been benefited by the widening a street. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal.

G. M. Stewart, for appellants. L. Bell and Theo. H. Culver, for respondent.

RAY, J.

This action is brought by the city of St. Louis on a special tax-bill to recover the amount which it is claimed the property of defendants has been benefited by the widening of Eighteenth street in said city. No point is made on the pleadings. "At the trial the plaintiff introduced evidence to show the steps taken by the city to secure the widening of Eighteenth street, for which this tax-bill was issued, including the ordinances providing therefor, and condemnation proceedings entitled `City v. Wall,' report of the commissioners, and also the testimony of expert witnesses to show that the property of the defendants had been benefited to the full extent of the sum named in the tax-bill, and rested its case. On the part of the defendants, the testimony of a number of expert witnesses was introduced, tending to show that defendants' property had not been benefited to any extent by the widening of the street, and should not have been assessed. These witnesses were all experienced real-estate agents and dealers." For the plaintiff, the court gave the following instruction: "The court instructs the jury that in determining the amount, if any, that defendants' property is benefited by the widening of Eighteenth street, as shown on this trial, the testimony of the expert witnesses who testified before them, if deemed unreasonable by the jury, may be disregarded by them." And for the defendants, the following: "(1) The jury are instructed that, while the city of St. Louis may condemn private property for the purpose of opening and widening its streets, they are also instructed that it is primarily liable to pay for the property so taken; and that no other property in the city is liable to be taxed or assessed to pay for the property so taken by the city except such property as has been specially benefited by such widening or opening, in some respect other than the other real estate in the city of St. Louis generally has been benefited by such widening or opening. (2) The jury are instructed that the question which they have to determine in this case is the benefit, if any, which has accrued to the property of Thomas Ranken, Jr., and others, the defendants in this case; and before they can find a verdict for the plaintiff for any amount they must be satisfied from the evidence that the defendants' property, which has been assessed, has been benefited by the widening of Eighteenth street at and near its junction with Clark avenue, as shown on this trial; and unless the jury find and believe from the evidence in this case that the property of defendants, situated on the east side of Eighteenth street, has been benefited by said widening of...