Mayor, Etc., of Savannah v. Weed

• Decision Date: 16 August 1895
• Citation: 23 S.E. 900,96 Ga. 670
• Parties: MAYOR, ETC., OF SAVANNAH v. WEED.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

23 S.E. 900

96 Ga. 670

MAYOR, ETC., OF SAVANNAH v. WEED.

Supreme Court of Georgia

August 16, 1895

Syllabus by the Court.

1. It is competent for the municipal authorities of the city of Savannah, under the powers conferred upon them by the charter of that city, in the improvement of its streets, to provide in a single ordinance for the pavement of several streets, a single street, or a portion of a street, and to charge against the property of abutting lot owners two-thirds of the cost of such improvement.

2. If in making the apportionment of the cost of such improvement the front-foot rule be adopted, the assessment should be made in such manner as to impose upon the respective lot owners their proportionate shares of the entire cost, estimated according to the width of the respective streets upon which their lots may abut.

3. A power "to grade, pave, macadamize or otherwise improve any portion of the width of any street in the said city, and to assess two-thirds of the cost of such paving, grading macadamizing or otherwise improving on the real estate abutting on each side of the street or lane improved," contemplates that, in making such assessment, the paving grading, macadamizing, or otherwise improving of each street is to be regarded as a separate improvement; and, in exercising such power, the city authorities must apportion the cost of such improvement according to the width of each particular street. Hence, where the scheme of the ordinance under which a proposed improvement is to be made contemplates the paving of a principal thoroughfare between two designated points, if, in the execution of this scheme, it becomes necessary to improve a portion of lateral streets, which, being improved, become coming an apportionment of the cost of the entire improvement the city authorities must regard each of such lateral streets as separate, and assess against the respective abutting lot owners their several proportions of such cost according to the width of the particular street upon which their property happens to about, and their frontage thereon.

Error from superior court, Chatham county; R. Falligant, Judge.

Execution, on the application of the mayor and aldermen of the city of Savannah, against Joseph D. Weed, to enforce an assessment. There was a judgment sustaining an affidavit of illegality and dismissing the execution, and the plaintiffs bring error. Affirmed.

Saml. B. Adams, for plaintiffs in error.

Erwin, Du Bignon & Chisholm and W.L. Clay, for defendant in error.

ATKINSON. J.

The official report states fully the facts upon which the questions of law involved in this case depend.

1. By an act of the general assembly approved October 1, 1887 (see Acts 1887, p. 537), the mayor and council of the city of Savannah were authorized "to adopt at any time an ordinance requiring the grading, paving, macadamizing or otherwise improving for travel of drainage any of the streets or lanes of said city, and to assess two-thirds of the cost of such paving, grading, macadamizing and otherwise improving on the real estate abutting on each side of the street or land improved," and further "to grade, pave macadamize or otherwise improve any portion of the width of any street in the said city, and to assess two-thirds of the cost of such paving, grading, macadamizing and otherwise improving on the real estate abutting on each side of the street or land improved.:" The power conferred by this act is legally exercised, whether separate ordinances be passed for each street intended to be improved, or whether the improvement of several streets be provided for in one ordinance. The passage of the ordinance is simply the evidence that, according to the discretion vested in the mayor and council, the improvement of the street or streets...