Parmelee v. the City of Chicago
| Decision Date | 30 September 1871 |
| Citation | 1871 WL 8133,60 Ill. 267 |
| Parties | FRANK PARMELEE et al.v.THE CITY OF CHICAGO,ELIZABETH BUNCH et al.v.THE CITY OF CHICAGO. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. JOSEPH E. GARY, Judge, presiding.
These two cases are in all respects the same, and the facts appear in the opinion.
Mr. JOHN BORDEN, for the appellants.
Mr. M. F. TULEY, Corporation Counsel, for the appellee. Mr. JUSTICE MCALLISTER delivered the opinion of the Court:
At the March term, 1871, of the Superior Court, an application was made by the collector of the city of Chicago, upon his report in certain condemnation proceedings for widening State street, for judgment against delinquent real estate, for the special assessment levied thereon in such proceeding; to which application various objections were made, in apt time, by the owners of such real estate, among which was the objection that the property and franchise of the Horse Railroad Company, whose tracks were in the street proposed to be widened, were specially benefited by the proposed improvement to a large amount; and that no part of the cost thereof was assessed against that company, but the same was omitted therefrom, knowingly and fraudulently, by the commissioners; and that the ordinance was void for not ordering any part of the cost to be assessed on the property and franchises of the said company, and not ordering the amount to be assessed on all property specially benefited.
To sustain the objections made, the objectors introduced in evidence certified copies of the entire proceedings, from which it appears that the commissioners, in their report recommending the improvement, and stating to what extent property could be found specially benefited, made no mention of the property of the Horse Railroad Company, but specified only real estate, and the entire proceedings show that the railroad company was not charged with any of the burdens of the improvement.
The first section of the ordinance authorizing the improvement, is as follows: “That State street, from Madison street to Jackson street, be and is hereby ordered widened to the width of one hundred feet, condemning the property necessary therefor, on the east side thereof, in accordance with the plan hereto annexed.” The second section requires that an appraisal be forthwith made of the damages and recompense due to the owners of the real estate necessary to be taken.
The third section declares that the sum of $194,951.61 be assessed by the commissioners upon the real estate by them deemed specially benefited by the improvement, in proportion as nearly as may be to the benefits resulting thereto. And the fourth section, that the sum of $3978.61 be chargeable to the general fund. The total estimate was $198,930.30. When the assessment roll was completed it comprehended as the only property benefited, real estate,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kansas City v. Bacon
...158 Ill. 64; Railroad v. Kankakee, 164 Ill. 608; 28 L. R. A. 249; Scammon v. Chicago, 42 Ill. 192; Chicago v. Baer, 41 Ill. 306; Parmalee v. Chicago, 60 Ill. 267; Dyer Harrison, 63 Cal. 447. See, also, dissenting opinion in Kansas City v. Bacon, 147 Mo. 283. (10) There was no examination of......
-
Kansas City v. Bacon
... ... the city at large. Section 15 of the charter amendment; ... Extension of Church Street, 49 Barb. 455; Scammon v ... Chicago, 42 Ill. 192. (6) Property exempt from general ... taxation is not exempt from local assessments. Sheehan v ... Hospital, 50 Mo. 156; Farrar ... judgment must be reversed. Scammon v. Chicago, 42 ... Ill. 192; Chicago v. Baer, 41 Ill. 306; Parmelee ... v. Chicago, 60 Ill. 267; Dyer v. Harrison, 63 ... Cal. 447. (9) The jury in this case was not a common law ... jury, and hence the jurors ... ...
-
Corrigan v. Kansas City
...the owners of the property assessed, and avoids the assessment. Scammon v. Chicago, 42 Ill. 192; Chicago v. Baer, 41 Ill. 306; Parmelee v. Chicago, 60 Ill. 267; Dyer Harrison, 63 Cal. 447. (3) This assessment is void, because there was no park, parkway, or boulevard in that district on whic......
-
In re North Terrace Park
...benefits against the other property assessed. Scammon v. City of Chicago, 42 Ill. 192; City of Chicago v. Baer, 41 Ill. 306; Parmelee v. City of Chicago, 60 Ill. 267; Dyer v. Harrison, 63 Cal. 10. In the foregoing remarks I have assumed the substantial validity of article 10, known as the "......