People Ex Rel. Louis C. Huck v. Trustees of The EState L. Newberry

• Decision Date: 30 September 1877
• Parties: THE PEOPLE ex rel. Louis C. Huckv.TRUSTEES OF THE ESTATE OF WALTER L. NEWBERRY et al.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

87 Ill. 41

1877 WL 9796 (Ill.)

THE PEOPLE ex rel. Louis C. Huck

v.TRUSTEES OF THE ESTATE OF WALTER L. NEWBERRY et al.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

September Term, 1877.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

APPEAL from the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. MARTIN R. M. WALLACE, Judge, presiding.

This was an application for judgment for delinquent school taxes.

The following is agreed to by the counsel for the respective parties:

“At the July term, 1877, of said court, the trustees of the estate of Walter L. Newberry, deceased, Robert R. Clarke, Joseph Bickerdike and George Bickerdike, filed objections to the entering of judgment against their property for the school tax extended against the same for the year 1876, on the ground that said property was located in school district No. 2, while the tax extended against said property was levied by district No. 13, of said township of Jefferson.

Prior to the year 1875, the property of objectors was undisputedly in district No. 2, and during said year 1875 the school trustees of said township of Jefferson undertook to change the boundary lines of district No. 13, by adding thereto a portion of the territory embraced in said district No. 2, including the property of objectors.

The clerk of said board of trustees filed in the office of the county clerk of said county a plat, upon which the property of the objectors is shown as lying in district No. 13, but did not file a copy of the record of the proceedings of the board in reference to such plat or change of boundary lines between districts No. 2 and 13, and did not file a list of taxpayers in said office of the county clerk; nor have any documents relating to any change in the boundary lines between said districts Nos. 2 and 13, except said plat, been filed at any time in the office of the said county clerk.

The court thereupon refused the application for judgment on the ground mentioned in said objection.

It is hereby further agreed in said cause, that appeal bond, on the part of appellant, is waived; and the Supreme Court may decide said cause upon the foregoing agreed statement of facts--no other record or transcript of record being required.”

Upon this, judgment was rendered in favor of the objectors, and the case is brought here upon the appeal of the collector.

Mr. JOHN M. ROUNTREE, and Messrs. BALDWIN & HANNA, for the appellant.

Messrs. D. C. & C. W. NICHOLES, and Mr. JOHN P. WILSON, for the appellees.

Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE SCHOLFIELD delivered the opinion of the Court:

The facts presented here, show that the school trustees of the town of Jefferson, during the year 1875, undertook to change the boundary lines of district No. 13, by adding thereto a portion of the territory embraced in district No. 2--and the territory thus embraced includes the property of the objectors. It is shown that the clerk of the board of trustees filed in the office of the county clerk a plat, upon which the property of the objectors is described as lying in district No. 13, and it is assessed and taxes extended against it as being within that district. It is, therefore, clear, that the present de facto district No. 13 includes the property of the objectors.

We think it is only pertinent to inquire whether, in this collateral proceeding, it is...