Firm Lumber Co. v. City of Hattiesburg
| Citation | 95 So. 250,132 Miss. 1 |
| Decision Date | 26 February 1923 |
| Docket Number | 23031 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi |
| Parties | FIRM LUMBER CO. v. CITY OF HATTIESBURG |
March 1923
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. Rule as to assessment of property where paving commenced prior to statute providing for assessment of abutting owners for cost thereof stated.
A municipality which commenced to pave its streets prior to the enactment of section 4, chapter 260, Laws of 1912 (Hemingway's Code, section 5944), and to pay therefor with the proceeds of its bonds, cannot, as long as that statute remains in force, assess the cost of street paving thereafter done against the abutting property owners.
APPEAL from circuit-court of Forrest county, HON. R. S. HALL, Judge.
Proceedings by the mayor and board of commissioners of the city of Hattiesburg, assessing the cost of street paving against the abutting property owners. From an order approving the assessment, the Firm Lumber Company appeals. Reversed, and judgment for appellant.
Judgment reversed.
Stevens & Heidelberg, for appellant.
D. E. & C. W. Sullivan, for appellee.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the court below approving a paving assessment by the mayor and board of commissioners of the city of Hattiesburg on property owned by the appellant.
The mayor and board of commissioners of the city of Hattiesburg, by an ordinance adopted in October, 1920, have paved a street on which certain property of the appellant abuts and have assessed the entire cost thereof against the abutting property owners, except the cost of paving street intersections, from which assessment the appellant appealed to the court below, and from an order there approving the assessment has appealed to this court.
Prior to the enactment of chapter 260, Laws of 1912, the city of Hattiesburg had paved a number of its streets and had paid therefor with the proceeds of the city's bonds issued and sold for that purpose; no local assessment being made on the property owners for any portion thereof. Since the enactment of that statute the city has paved several of its streets; the cost thereof, except street intersections, being assessed against the abutting property owners.
The contention of the appellant here is that under section 4 chapter 260, Laws of 1912, the city must continue to pay for paving its streets in the same manner that it was so doing prior to the enactment of that stat...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Stingily v. City of Jackson
...224, Laws of 1922 (the Act approved March 27, 1922, referred to in the Doxey case but not passed upon) had not been repealed when the Hattiesburg case decided, and, as it does not directly permit a changing of plan of making assessments, and does directly state that it does not repeal any e......
-
City of Canton v. Davis
... ... It is ... clear that under Lumber Co. v. City of Hattiesburg, ... 132 Miss. 1, 95 So. 250; and City of Jackson v ... Doxey, 128 ... being chapter 260, Laws of 1912. City of Jackson v ... Doxey, 128 Miss. 618; Firm Lbr. Co. v. City of ... Hattiesburg, 132 Miss. 1; and Firm Lbr. Co. v. City ... of Hattiesburg, ... ...
- Cox v. Timlake
-
Moore v. Board
...Miss. 618; Stingily v. Jackson, 140 Miss. 19; Jackson v. Graves, 134 Miss. 63; Union Savings Bank v. Jackson, 122 Miss. 557; Lumber Co. v. Hattiesburg, 132 Miss. 1, 133 808; City of Pascagoula v. Val Verde, 138 Miss. 399. J. W. Conger, for appellee. The order or resolution of necessity pass......