People v. City of Le Roy, No. 13287.

CourtSupreme Court of Illinois
Writing for the CourtDUNN
Citation293 Ill. 278,127 N.E. 695
PartiesPEOPLE v. CITY OF LE ROY.
Docket NumberNo. 13287.
Decision Date16 June 1920

293 Ill. 278
127 N.E. 695

PEOPLE
v.
CITY OF LE ROY.

No. 13287.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

June 16, 1920.


Error to Circuit Court, McLean County; Sain Welty, Judge.

Information in the nature of quo warranto by the People of the State of Illinois against the City of Le Roy. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error.

Affirmed.

[127 N.E. 696]


[293 Ill. 278]Miles K. Young, State's Atty., and A. E. & R. C. De Mange, all of Bloomington, for the People.

Leslie J. Owen, of Le Roy, and Barry & Morrissey, of Bloomington, for defendant in error.


DUNN, J.

This writ of error is prosecuted to reverse a judgment of the circuit court of McLean county in favor of the defendant to an information in the nature of quo warranto. The information, which was filed on August 14, 1918, charged that the city of Le Roy had been unlawfully exercising corporate powers for 13 years last past over a certain tract of land of about 8 1/2 acres which was not within the corporate limits of the city, by assessing, levying, and collecting taxes on said territory for the support of the city government and special assessments [293 Ill. 279]for local improvements constructed by the city, and had otherwise exercised corporate jurisdiction over said territory without warrant of law. The defendant filed two pleas. The plaintiff replied to the first and demurred to the second. The demurrer was overruled, and, the plaintiff having elected to stand by it, final judgment was entered in favor of the defendant. The sole question, therefore, is the sufficiency of this plea.

The plea alleged that on May 31, 1904, Barley & Pfitzenmeyer made a written offer to the defendant, at a special meeting of the city council, that if it would construct water mains in certain streets and extensions they would furnish certain other water mains without expense to the city to form a complete circuit; that the council voted to accept the proposition, provided that Barley & Pfitzenmeyer would incorporate certain land within the city; that Barley & Pfitzenmeyer, who were then the owners of the land described in the information, thereupon caused it to be surveyed and platted as Barley & Pfitzenmeyer's East Park addition to Le Roy, and on June 13, 1904, at a regular meeting of the city council, presented the plat, together with their certificate thereto signed and acknowledged and the certificate of the surveyor, and it was moved and carried that the territory be and the same is hereby received into the corporate limits of the city of Le Roy; that thereupon the mayor and city clerk attached a certificate to said plat to the effect that said addition and plat had been approved by the city council, and the plat, with the accompanying certificates, was recorded in the recorder's office of the county; that the water pipes were laid as provided for; that Barley & Pfitzenmeyer conveyed portions of the premises from time to time, describing them in all their deeds as lots in Barley & Pfitzenmeyer's East Park addition to the city of Le Roy, and all of the present owners acquired title by such description; that on March 27, 1908, all of the owners of said premises brought suit to quiet title to the land, describing [293 Ill. 280]the separate tracts in the same way, and thereafter a decree was entered quieting title by the same description; that the city, after June, 1904, annually levied taxes against said premises by...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 practice notes
  • State ex Inf. McKittrick v. Mo. Utilities Co., No. 34073.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • September 8, 1936
    ...S.W. 135; State ex rel. v. Town of Mansfield, 99 Mo. App. 146; State ex rel. Letchner v. Dearing, 253 Mo. 605; People v. City of Le Roy, 293 Ill. 278, 127 N.E. 695. (2) This court should dismiss this action because of the pendency of a suit in the United States Circuit Court of Appeals conc......
  • State ex Inf. Shartel v. Mo. Utilities Co., No. 31441.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • October 5, 1932
    ...v. Farmers Tel. Exch. Co., 294 Mo. 623, 243 S.W. 153; State v. Oconto Elec. Co., 165 Wis. 467, 161 N.W. 789; People v. City of Le Roy, 293 Ill. 278, 127 N.E. 695; People v. Jackson, 305 Ill. 385, 137 N.E. 237; People v. Arnett, 317 Ill. 425, 148 N.E. 306; State ex rel. School Dist. v. Kinka......
  • People ex rel. Hansen v. Phelan, Nos. 1-92-2915
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • March 16, 1993
    ...to contest Dunne's authority, 8 their challenge is simply untimely, as intervenor Stroger suggests. (People v. City of Le Roy (1920), 293 Ill. 278, 127 N.E. 695 (challenge rejected because no benefit from voiding improper annexation and universal acquiescence over more than ten years).) Her......
  • Fiedler v. Eckfeldt, No. 19067.
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • June 6, 1929
    ...to question the organization of the district by quo warranto. People v. Hanker, 197 Ill. 409, 64 N. E. 253;People v. City of Le Roy, 293 Ill. 278, 127 N. E. 695;Jameson v. People, 16 Ill. 257, 63 Am. Dec. 304;Soule v. People, 205 Ill. 618, 69 N. E. 22. [7][8][335 Ill. 17]The statute require......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
  • State ex Inf. McKittrick v. Mo. Utilities Co., No. 34073.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • September 8, 1936
    ...S.W. 135; State ex rel. v. Town of Mansfield, 99 Mo. App. 146; State ex rel. Letchner v. Dearing, 253 Mo. 605; People v. City of Le Roy, 293 Ill. 278, 127 N.E. 695. (2) This court should dismiss this action because of the pendency of a suit in the United States Circuit Court of Appeals conc......
  • State ex Inf. Shartel v. Mo. Utilities Co., No. 31441.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • October 5, 1932
    ...v. Farmers Tel. Exch. Co., 294 Mo. 623, 243 S.W. 153; State v. Oconto Elec. Co., 165 Wis. 467, 161 N.W. 789; People v. City of Le Roy, 293 Ill. 278, 127 N.E. 695; People v. Jackson, 305 Ill. 385, 137 N.E. 237; People v. Arnett, 317 Ill. 425, 148 N.E. 306; State ex rel. School Dist. v. Kinka......
  • People ex rel. Hansen v. Phelan, Nos. 1-92-2915
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • March 16, 1993
    ...to contest Dunne's authority, 8 their challenge is simply untimely, as intervenor Stroger suggests. (People v. City of Le Roy (1920), 293 Ill. 278, 127 N.E. 695 (challenge rejected because no benefit from voiding improper annexation and universal acquiescence over more than ten years).) Her......
  • Fiedler v. Eckfeldt, No. 19067.
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • June 6, 1929
    ...to question the organization of the district by quo warranto. People v. Hanker, 197 Ill. 409, 64 N. E. 253;People v. City of Le Roy, 293 Ill. 278, 127 N. E. 695;Jameson v. People, 16 Ill. 257, 63 Am. Dec. 304;Soule v. People, 205 Ill. 618, 69 N. E. 22. [7][8][335 Ill. 17]The statute require......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT