Lenox Land Co. v. City of Oakdale
Decision Date | 10 March 1910 |
Citation | 137 Ky. 484,125 S.W. 1089 |
Parties | LENOX LAND CO. v. CITY OF OAKDALE. NEW LOUISVILLE JOCKEY CLUB v. SAME. |
Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County, Chancery Branch, Second Division.
"To be officially reported."
Suit by the Lenox Land Company and by the New Louisville Jockey Club against the City of Oakdale. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.
Fred Forcht, Jr., D. W. Baird, Wm. H. Field, and Flexner & Campbell, for appellants.
Edwards Ogden & Peak and Wm. Mix, for appellee.
These two appeals involving the same questions will be disposed of together.
Oakdale is a city of the fifth class. Section 3611, Ky. St (Russell's St.§ 1630), a part of the charter of fifth-class cities, provides that: In section 3612, it is provided that:
In 1908 the council of Oakdale, by appropriate ordinances following in all respects the provisions of the statute, annexed to the city adjacent territory owned by the New Louisville Jockey Club and the Lenox Land Company. In 1909, more than six months after the ordinance annexing the territory became effective, the appellants filed their respective petitions setting out the annexation of the territory in pursuance of the ordinances, and alleging that, as there was neither a daily nor weekly paper published in the city of Oakdale, the ordinances were posted in public places, as required by the statute, but that neither of the plaintiffs had any notice that the city proposed to enact the ordinances, or either of them, and consequently had no opportunity to file in the circuit court, within 30 days after the ordinance proposing the annexation was passed, a petition setting forth the reasons why such territory should not be annexed. They further averred that neither of them resided in the city of Oakdale, nor did either of them have any occasion to go there during the time the ordinances were posted; that if they...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Appeal of City of Lenexa to Decision of Bd. of County Com'rs of Johnson County, 54422
...as clear a statement of this point of view as may be found was expressed by the Kentucky Supreme Court in Lenox Land Co. v. City of Oakdale, 137 Ky. 484, 489, 125 S.W. 1089, 1091: " '... [I]t has been repeatedly announced, by this court and others, that the question of due process of law or......
-
City of Leb. v. Goodin ex rel. Good (In re in Revocable Trust)
...v. Jameson, 215 S.W.3d 9, 15 (Ky.2006) (citing Bob Hook Chevrolet Isuzu, Inc. v. Com. Transp. Cabinet, 983 S.W.2d 488, 490 (Ky.1998)). 4.Lenox Land Co. v. City of Oakdale, 137 Ky. 484, 125 S.W. 1089, 1091 (1910) (“The extension or reduction of the boundaries of a city or town is held, witho......
-
State ex rel. Jordan v. City of Overland Park
...as clear a statement of this point of view as may be found was expressed by the Kentucky Supreme Court in Lenox Land Co. v. City of Oakdale, 137 Ky. 484, 489, 125 S.W. 1089, 1091: '. . . (I)t has been repeatedly announced, by this court and others, that the question of due process of law or......
-
City of Louisville v. Kraft
...White v. City of Glasgow, 148 Ky. 13, 146 S.W. 19; Board of Trustees of Elkton v. Gill, 94 Ky. 138, 21 S.W. 579; Lenox Land Co. v. City of Oakdale, 137 Ky. 484, 125 S.W. 1089; Carrithers v. City of Shelbyville, 126 Ky. 769, 104 S.W. 744, 17 L.R.A.,N.S., 421; Cheaney v. Hooser, 9 B.Mon. 330;......