McKee v. Town of Pendleton
| Decision Date | 29 May 1900 |
| Docket Number | 19,181 |
| Citation | 57 N.E. 532,154 Ind. 652 |
| Parties | McKee et al. v. Town of Pendleton et al |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
From the Madison Circuit Court.
Reversed.
W. A Kittinger, E. D. Reardon and W. S. Diven, for appellants.
E. B Goodykoontz, G. M. Ballard and B. H. Campbell, for appellees.
This is an action to enjoin the trustees of the town of Pendleton from entering into a contract for the improvement of a street known as North Pendleton avenue.
It is averred, in substance, in the complaint that on the 9th day of February, 1899, the board of trustees passed a declaratory resolution for the improvement of North Pendleton avenue from the bridge across Fall creek to the north line of the C. C. C. & St. L. railroad and the sidewalks along said street between said points according to plans and specifications on file with the town clerk; that said board of trustees proposes to improve said street by grading and paving with brick the full width of the roadway and by grading and paving with cement the sidewalks, and by placing a stone curb along the outer line of the sidewalks; that the trustees intend to, and will, contract for said improvement, if not enjoined, at a cost of $ 3.50 per lineal foot of the entire length of said street on each side thereof, and propose to pay for said improvement by adding to the total cost of the improvement the other expenses of the proceedings, and dividing the total thus obtained by the whole number of lineal feet on each side of said street, and by multiplying, by the result thus obtained, the number of lineal feet in each lot and parcel abutting on said street--the sum so arrived at to be the cost to each lot and tract bordering on said street, the town paying for the street and alley crossings in the same proportions; that the cost of said improvement will be thus apportioned without any reference to accruing benefits to the several lots and lands abutting on said street, and without taking into consideration any other fact than the total cost of said improvement and the equal distribution thereof to each front foot irrespective of benefits; that the special benefits resulting from the proposed improvement will not exceed $ 1.50 per lineal front foot on the average of all, and will not benefit the lots and lands owned by the plaintiffs, and each of them, more than one-half the sum proposed to be assessed against them as above set forth; that it will not benefit the lot owned by the plaintiff, Mary C. Brown, in any sum whatever; that it will not benefit the lot owned by the plaintiff, W. C. Bryant, to exceed fifty cents per foot; that the total special benefits to all the bordering lots and lands will not exceed one-half the total cost of said improvement; that the cost to 597...
To continue reading
Request your trial