Extension of Boundaries of City of Clinton, Matter of, 55264
Decision Date | 09 May 1984 |
Docket Number | No. 55264,55264 |
Citation | 450 So.2d 85 |
Parties | In the Matter of the EXTENSION OF the BOUNDARIES OF the CITY OF CLINTON, Mississippi: Marvin MUIRHEAD, J.D. Cox, and Carolyn Moore, et al. v. CITY OF CLINTON, Mississippi. |
Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Russel D. Moore, III, Moore, Royals & Hartung, Jackson, for appellants.
L. Arnold Pyle, Jerry L. Mills, Pyle, Harris, Dreher & Mills, Jackson, for appellee.
Before ROY NOBLE LEE, P.J., and PRATHER and SULLIVAN, JJ.
This appeal is from a final decree of the Chancery Court, First Judicial District, Hinds County, Mississippi, ratifying and approving an ordinance adopted by the Mayor and Board of Aldermen of the City of Clinton dated February 2, 1982. The appellants have assigned the following errors in the trial below:
(1) The City of Clinton has totally failed to show any need to expand.
(2) Sections 15, 16, 17 and 18, Township 6 North, Range 1 West, being the north and northeast area of the presently existing City of Clinton boundaries are not reasonably in the path of Clinton's growth pattern.
(3) The evidence did not disclose any health hazards existing in Sections 15, 16, 17 and 18, Township 6 North, Range 1 West, and hence does not constitute a basis to justify annexation.
(4) The City of Clinton has failed to demonstrate a financial capability to make the improvements and provide municipal services as promised.
(5) Sections 15, 16, 17 and 18, Township 6 North, Range 1 West, have no need of the services offered by the City of Clinton.
(6) The lower court erred in overruling appellant's motion to reopen for the purpose of introducing newly-discovered evidence.
The City of Clinton was comprised of 6,238 acres prior to the proposed annexation, and the area ordered to be annexed constitutes 9,310.7 acres. After a lengthy hearing, the chancellor rendered the following opinion, which states the facts of the case and the basis of the decree:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Extension of Boundaries of City of Jackson, Matter of, 58267
...aggressive annexation policy in recent years has led to its sharing with Jackson a common boundary. See In re Extension of Boundaries of City of Clinton, 450 So.2d 85 (Miss.1984). While not quite so clogged that infarction is imminent, the arteries potentially carrying blood to Jackson's he......
-
Enlargement of Corporate Limits of City of Hattiesburg, Matter of
...Enlargement of the Boundaries of Yazoo City v. City of Yazoo City, 452 So.2d 837 (Miss.1984); In the Matter of the Extension of the Boundaries of the City of Clinton, 450 So.2d 85 (Miss.1984); Curet v. City of Long Beach, 399 So.2d 1351 An examination of the record reveals that Chancellor D......
-
IN RE EXTENSION OF BOUND. OF BATESVILLE
...(Miss.1986); Enlargement of Boundaries of Yazoo City v. City of Yazoo City, 452 So.2d 837, 838 (Miss.1984); Extension of Boundaries of City of Clinton, 450 So.2d 85, 89 (Miss.1984)). "Where there is conflicting, credible evidence, we defer to the findings below." Bassett v. Town of Taylorsv......
-
Enlargement of Corporate Limits and Boundaries of City of Gulfport, Matter of, 92-CA-0033
...Enlargement of the Boundaries of Yazoo City v. City of Yazoo City, 452 So.2d 837 (Miss.1984); In the Matter of the Extension of the Boundaries of the City of Clinton, 450 So.2d 85 (Miss.1984); Curet v. City of Long Beach, 399 So.2d 1351 Matter of Enlargement of Corp. Limits of Hattiesburg, ......