Crawford v. City of Bridgeport

• Decision Date: 12 March 1918
• Citation: 103 A. 125,92 Conn. 431
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Parties: CRAWFORD v. CITY OF BRIDGEPORT.

103 A. 125

92 Conn. 431

CRAWFORD

v. CITY OF BRIDGEPORT.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

March 12, 1918.

Appeal from Superior Court, Fairfield County; Howard J. Curtis, Judge.

Action by George E. Crawford in the nature of an appeal to obtain relief from an assessment of benefits and damages occasioned by the widening and enlargement of a street against the City of Bridgeport. Judgment annuling assessment for irregularities in proceedings, and the City appeals. No error.

On July 23, 1917, the common council of the defendant city ordered a hearing to be held on the 6th day of August, 1917, in relation to the widening and extending of Cannon street in Bridgeport. Notice of this hearing was given to the plaintiff. The plaintiff was the owner of certain land and buildings, a portion of which would be taken by the city for the purpose of this public improvement. The public hearing was held on August 6, 1917. Upon the same day the common council of the city of Bridgeport after this hearing adopted the following resolution:

"Resolved that Cannon street at the junction of Cannon street and Fairfield avenue be, and it hereby is, ordered widened and enlarged by extending the south street line of said Cannon street and by prolongation of the south street line on Cannon street as it at present exists east of Courtland street from the westerly line of Courtland street until it intersects the southerly line of Fairfield avenue."

Upon the same day, and after the common council of the city of Bridgeport had adopted this resolution, the common council also adopted the following resolution:

"Resolved that F. L. Black, Harry F. Jewett, and Morris W. Brown be, and they are hereby, appointed a special committee to make the layout, extension, widening, and enlargement above ordered and report in writing their doings to this common council, which report shall embody particular descriptions of such layouts, extensions, widening, and enlargements."

Upon the same day the special committee's report was presented to the common council signed by Black, Jewett, and Brown, purporting to be the report of the special committee. Before the meeting of the common council Black, who at this time was assistant city engineer of the city of Bridgeport, prepared this written report, and he, Harry F. Jewett, and Morris W. Brown separately and at different times before the meeting and before their appointment as such committee signed the report and left the same with the city clerk of the city of Bridgeport. On the 6th day of August, 1917, following the resolution of the common council appointing Black, Jewett, and Brown a special committee, the written report signed by them was presented to the common council, and was adopted by it and referred to the board of assessors of benefits and damages. Black, Jewett, and Brown did not meet together at any time either before or after their appointment as a special committee, but on the 6th day of August, 1917, and prior to their appointment, did separately approve and sign the proposed report above described. The board of assessors of benefits and damages of the city of Bridgeport proceeded to assess benefits and damages for this public improvement, but before proceeding with such assessment they failed to cause to be filed in the office of the town clerk of the city of Bridgeport a written notice setting forth the names of the persons owning or having an interest in the land to be affected by this improvement. No such notice was ever filed in the office of the town clerk in connection with these proceedings for the assessment of benefits and damages. On the 27th day of August, 1917, the board of assessors of benefits and damages reported its doings to the common council of the city of Bridgeport, and awarded to the plaintiff $62,720 damages over and above all benefits as resulting to the plaintiff from this public improvement, although the plaintiff claimed $229,000. On the 4th day of September, 1917, this report was adopted by the common council, and on the 6th day of September, 1917, the resolution adopting this report was approved by the mayor of the city of Bridgeport, and on the 10th day of September, 1917, the report was duly published as provided by the charter of the defendant city. The plaintiff received actual notice of the proceedings before the board of appraisal of benefits and damages, and appeared before this board and made claims and offered evidence in support thereof as to the amount of damages and benefits accruing to him from this public improvement, and neither before the board of appraisal nor thereafter before the common council did the plaintiff make any claim that the proceedings were illegal or invalid.

The plaintiff bases his cause of action upon two grounds: The first because of the irregularity in the report made by the special committee said to have been appointed by the common council to make this layout; and the second the failure of the board of assessors to file in the office of the town clerk written notice as required by the provisions of the charter. These claims the superior court sustained.

William H. Condey, Jr., of Bridgeport, for appellant. Carl Foster, of Bridgeport, for appellee.

RORABACK, J. (after stating the facts as above). Where the land of an individual is taken in invitum for public use, under the provisions of positive law, every requisite of the statute must be complied with, and this must appear on the face of the proceedings for taking the land. Nichols v. Bridgeport, 23 Conn. 208, 60 Am. Dec. 636; Edwards v....