Kilmer v. People Ex Rel. William T. Johnson.
| Decision Date | 10 May 1883 |
| Citation | 106 Ill. 529,1883 WL 10243 |
| Parties | CHAUNCEY KILMERv.THE PEOPLE ex rel. William T. Johnson. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. MASON B. LOOMIS, Judge, presiding.
Mr. E. J. WHITEHEAD, for the appellant.
This appeal is brought to reverse a judgment of the county court of Cook county against certain real estate in the village of Hyde Park, belonging to the appellant, upon a special assessment made by the municipal authorities of said village, under the provisions of article 9, chapter 24, of the Revised Statutes.
Counsel for appellant, in his printed brief, urges but a single objection to the validity of the proceedings culminating in the judgment complained of, and to that alone we will direct our attention. By section 27 of the article above mentioned, the commissioners, upon the completion of the assessment roll, are required, among other things, to “send by mail to such owner of premises assessed, whose name and place of residence are known to them, a notice,” properly addressed to such owner, setting forth a short description of the premises; the fact of their assessment for public improvement; the amount of the assessment; the name and term of the court to which the assessment roll will be returned for confirmation, and the date of such notice. By the 28th section one or more of the commissioners, on or before the final hearing of the assessment, are required to file in the court an affidavit showing a compliance with this provision of the act, which affidavit is declared to be prima facie evidence of such notice. It appears that the affidavit relied on to show such notice in the present case, by inadvertence failed to show the term of the court to which the assessment roll would be returned for confirmation,--the notice in every other respect being formal and sufficient. This fact being developed on the hearing of the present application, appellee entered a motion for leave to amend the affidavit by inserting the proper term of the court, so as to make it conform to the facts, and in support of such motion introduced as a witness Daniel H. Hoone, who testified that he was one of the commissioners who made the assessment in question; that he posted and mailed the notices of the confirmation of the assessment roll, and that he was the same person who made the affidavit showing the mailing of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Payson v. People ex rel. Parsons
...to include his lands within the limits of the district, and make it liable for this special assessment. Schertz v. People, supra; Kilmer v. People, 106 Ill. 529;Cass v. People (Ill. Sup.) 46 N. E. 729. It is insisted by appellee that this is a collateral proceeding, and appellant cannot con......
-
Culver v. People ex rel. Kochersperger
...upon an application for judgment, and order of sale of the lots, as well as at any other time.’ Schertz v. People, 105 Ill. 27;Kilmer v. People, 106 Ill. 529;Goodwillie v. City of Lake View, 137 Ill. 51, 27 N. E. 15;Ayer v. City of Chicago, 149 Ill. 262, 37 N. E. 57;Dickey v. City of Chicag......
-
Chicago W.D. Ry. Co. v. People ex rel. Kern
...256;Schertz v. People, 105 Ill. 27;Murphy v. People, 120 Ill. 234, 11 N. E. 202;Riebling v. People, 145 Ill. 120, 33 N. E. 1090;Kilmer v. People, 106 Ill. 529; and Schertz v. People, 105 Ill. 27,-are cited by appellant as cases showing that the attack here made is not collateral. If the not......
-
Cook Cnty. v. Calumet & C. Canal & Dock Co.
...judgment may be corrected at any time. Ogle v. Lee, 2 Cranch, 33;Brush v. Seguin, 24 Ill. 254;Constantine v. Foster, 57 Ill. 36;Kilmer v. People, 106 Ill. 529;Fort Dearborn Lodge v. Klein, 115 Ill. 177, 3 N. E. Rep. 272; Setzke v. Setzke, 121 Ill. 30, 11 N. E. Rep. 915. In my opinion, the e......