Kansas City v. Metropolitan Water Co.
Citation | 164 F. 728 |
Parties | KANSAS CITY v. METROPOLITAN WATER CO. |
Decision Date | 10 October 1908 |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of Kansas |
Miller Buchan & Miller, Samuel Maher, and Willard P. Hall, for complainant.
H. L Alden, City Counselor, for defendants.
At the 1908 Special Session of the Legislature of this state (Laws 1908, p. 30, c. 33), there was enacted a law conferring upon cities of the first class the power of condemning and taking over the property, or any part thereof, of any water company located in any such city, which act, in so far as material to this inquiry, provides, as follows:
'Sec. 3. Upon the passage of such resolution as is specified in the next preceding section, the city passing the same may apply to the judge of the district court of the county in which said city is located, or to the judge of any court of general jurisdiction having a clerk and seal of the county in which said city is located, for the appointment of three commissioners to make appraisement of the value of the property so condemned and for the assessment of all damages. Said commissioners shall be residents and freeholders of the county in which said city is located. Such appointment shall be made by the judge of the court on the written application of the city by its attorney or legal representative; the appointment shall be made in writing, under the hand of the judge, and delivered to the city applying therefor; the application for the certificate of appointment shall be recorded in the office of the register of deeds of the county in which said city is located. In case any vacancy occurs, or any such commissioner or commissioners refuse to serve on such board, the judge of the court to which application is made shall appoint, in the manner herein provided, some other person or persons having the qualifications herein provided. Such commissioners shall be sworn to honestly and faithfully discharge their duties as such commissioners.
'Sec. 4. Upon their appointment and qualification the said commissioners shall give notice of the time and place of their meeting to value property sought to be acquired by the city and to assess the damages. Such notice shall be addressed 'to whom it may concern,' and given by publication for thirty successive days (excluding Sundays) next preceding the time fixed for said meeting in some daily newspaper published in such city. Said notice shall specify that the purpose of the meeting of the said commissioners is to ascertain and determine the value of property condemned and the damages. At the time fixed by said notice, or at the time to which said meeting may be adjourned, the said commissioners shall proceed to ascertain and determine the value of the property condemned by the city and the damages. They may examine experts and resort to all means within their power to arrive at the value of the property condemned, and the owner or any one interested therein, or who may be affected by the condemnation proceedings, may be heard before said commissioners, and may produce such testimony before them to enable said commissioners to arrive at the fair and equitable value of the property condemned and the damages. The said commissioners may adjourn as often and for such length of time as may be deemed convenient, and may during any adjournment perfect or correct all errors or omissions in the giving of notice by serving new notices or making new publications, citing corporations or individual property owners who have not been notified or to whom defective or insufficient notice has been given, and notice of any adjourned meeting shall be as effective as notice of the first meeting of the commissioners.
Upon the completion of their hearing and deliberations the said commissioners shall make their report in writing, and shall forthwith file the same with the clerk of the county in which the city is located. Said report shall be filed within twenty days from the date of the last meeting of said commissioners.'
Thereafter the city of Kansas City, Kan. (hereinafter called the 'City'), by its mayor and common council, passed a resolution declaring it necessary and for the best interests of the city to avail itself of the power conferred to condemn and take over the property and plant of the Metropolitan Water Company (hereinafter called the 'Water Company') in the city, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. American Tobacco Co.
... ... Tobacco Company in the city of London, where such contract ... was a legal and proper one. It is ... ...
-
In re Law
...v. St. Bernard Min. Co, supra; City of New York v. Sage, supra; Minneapolis, etc, R. Co. v. Nestor (C.C.) 50 F. 1; Kansas City v. Metropolitan Water Co. (C.C.) 164 F. 728; Kaw Valley Drainage Dist. v. Metropolitan Water Co. (CCA.) 186 F. 315; In re City of Seattle (D.C.) 237 F. In resisting......
-
Des Moines Elevator & Grain Co. v. UNDERWRITERS'G. ASS'N
...S. Ct. 251, 49 L. Ed. 462; Terral v. Burke Const. Co., 257 U. S. 529, 42 S. Ct. 188, 66 L. Ed. 352, 21 A. L. R. 186; Kansas City v. Metropolitan Water Co. (C. C.) 164 F. 728. It is impossible to distinguish that case from this so far as the principle involved is concerned. There the maker a......
-
Stewart v. Nebraska Tire & Rubber Co.
...S. Ct. 251, 49 L. Ed. 462; Terral v. Burke Const. Co., 257 U. S. 529, 42 S. Ct. 188, 66 L. Ed. 352, 21 A. L. R. 186; Kansas City v. Metropolitan Water Co. (C. C.) 164 F. 728. There was no error in overruling the motion to remand. It is next contended that the lower court erred in quashing t......