Decatur Land Co. v. City of New Decatur

• Decision Date: 21 December 1916
• Docket Number: 8 Div. 897
• Parties: DECATUR LAND CO. v. CITY OF NEW DECATUR.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

73 So. 509

198 Ala. 293

DECATUR LAND CO. v. CITY OF NEW DECATUR.

8 Div. 897

Supreme Court of Alabama

December 21, 1916

Appeal from Circuit Court, Morgan County; R.C. Brickell, Judge.

Proceedings for the assessment of value of improvements against certain lots by the City of New Decatur against the Decatur Land Company. From a judgment on appeal to the circuit court dismissing the appeal, the Company appeals. Affirmed.

Eyster & Eyster, of New Decatur, for appellant.

Tennis Tidewell, of New Decatur, for appellee.

McCLELLAN J.

The controversy involved in this appeal from the Morgan circuit court arose out of the action of the city of New Decatur in assessing approximately 145 city lots under article 26 of chapter 32 of the Political Code, whereby municipalities are empowered to determine upon and to make public improvements of their streets, and to assess the cost thereof, within limits prescribed (Const. 1901, § 223), against abutting property. A sufficient general statement of the provisions appearing in article 26, c. 32, is made in City of Birmingham v. Wills, 178 Ala. 198, 204-206, 59 So. 173 Ann.Cas.1915B, 746. The city council of Decatur listed the approximately 145 lots belonging to the Decatur Land Company and set opposite each lot, as the statutes require, its judgment of the amount (varying with practically every lot) each of said lots would be enhanced in value by the improvement contemplated. Code, § 1375. Such assessments were confirmed by the city council; and the Decatur Land Company took a single appeal to the circuit court. Code, § 1389 et seq. The city moved in the circuit court to dismiss the appeal, on the ground, among others, that each assessment of each lot by the city council was a distinct judgment or decree against each lot, and that a single appeal from these several judgments or decrees was unauthorized. The court granted the motion on the ground stated, dismissing the appeal, and this appeal is to review that action of the circuit court. The doctrine upon which this ruling was rested is fully set forth in Mobile Imp. Co. v. Stein, 158 Ala. 113, 115, 116, 48 So. 368, 17 Ann.Cas. 288, and was later followed and approved in Fulton v. State, 170 Ala. 69, 54 So. 165. It is that two or more distinct judgments or decrees, each of which will support an appeal cannot be united in one appeal. While this rule was announced and applied to a review sought by appeal to the Supreme Court, it is equally applicable to appeals authorized from separate assessments of distinct lots by municipal bodies in the exercise of their powers with respect to public improvements within their jurisdictions.

When the provisions of the Constitution (section 223) and of the statutes (...