Kent v. City of Harlan

• Decision Date: 09 April 1915
• Docket Number: No. 29594.,29594.
• Citation: 170 Iowa 90,152 N.W. 6
• Parties: KENT ET AL. v. CITY OF HARLAN ET AL.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

170 Iowa 90

152 N.W. 6

KENT ET AL.

v.CITY OF HARLAN ET AL.

No. 29594.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

April 9, 1915.

Appeal from District Court, Shelby County; O. D. Wheeler, Judge.

Action to enjoin a nuisance. It is brought against the defendant city and the Mayor thereof by plaintiffs, as property owners, who claim to be injured in their property by the alleged nuisance, and this consists in the maintenance of a rack of hitching posts in front of such property. Affirmed.Smith & Gunderson, of Harlan, for appellants.

E. S. White, of Harlan, for appellees.

EVANS, J.

The city of Harlan contains between 2,500 and 3,000 people. The city council authorized the construction of a row of hitching posts upon the east side of Eighth street. This is a north and south street, and is located one block west of the principal street and the public square. Hitching posts had been heretofore banished from the public square and the principal street. Other places were sought as suitable for such purpose, and Eighth street was selected. This street has an ordinary width of 66 feet. On the east it abuts upon the property of the plaintiff Hudson. This property is a livery stable, and is built up to the lot line. The row of posts runs parallel thereto and 18 feet therefrom. The plaintiff Hudson contends that it interferes with his ingress and egress to and from his barn. On the opposite side of the street is the residence property of plaintiff Kent, who has an entrance to his property from this street near his north line. He contends that the use of the street for hitching post purposes will interfere with his ingress and egress to and from his lot. At the north and rear end of this lot is a public alley extending east and west. He contends also that the use of the hitching posts will interfere with his use of this alley. West of the residence of Kent is a residence owned by the plaintiff Allen, who complains of the obstruction to the common alley caused by the use of the hitching posts. On the west side of the street Kent's parking contains a number of shade trees. The distance from the hitching post line to these trees is 37 feet. A wagon equipped with a hayrack will occupy about 30 feet of that space. This would only leave 7 feet for a passageway. Manifestly the travel going in different directions could not pass upon such a narrow strip. Manifestly, also, this would tend to interfere with the ingress and egress to and from the property of plaintiff Kent.

[1] We have held that hitching posts upon a street authorized by...