Sligh v. City of Grand Rapids

• Decision Date: 06 February 1891
• Citation: 84 Mich. 497,47 N.W. 1093
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Parties: SLIGH et al. v. CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS et al.

47 N.W. 1093

84 Mich. 497

SLIGH et al. v. CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS et al.

Supreme Court of Michigan

February 6, 1891

Appeal from superior court of Grand Rapids, in chancery; EDWIN A BURLINGAME, Judge.

Smedley & Irwin, for appellants.

J W. Ransom, (W. W. Taylor, of counsel,) for appellees.

LONG, J.

The bill was filed in this cause in the superior court of Grand Rapids, in chancery, by the complainant Sligh and 60 other residents of the city of Grand Rapids, to restrain the city of Grand Rapids and its officers from collecting assessments levied against the property of the complainants. It appears that in 1886 the city authorities regraded Ellsworth avenue from Bartlett street to East Fulton street, and the common council levied an assessment to pay the costs of said regrade upon a district which they deemed benefited by such regrade which assessment was paid. In 1887 certain parties living on East Ellsworth avenue, who had been assessed for benefits derived on account of said regrade, and who had paid their assessments, claimed damages to their property on account of such regrade, and filed their claims in the superior court of Grand Rapids, by virtue of section 2, tit. 6, of the charter of said city, as amended by Act No. 292, Local Acts 1885, and Act No. 436, Local Acts 1887, which provides that in all cases where the grade of any street or alley has been established, and said street or alley has been graded by the proper authorities, and the grade thereafter altered by the city, the owner of any lot or parcel of land who shall be injured by such alteration of said grade shall be entitled to compensation therefor. These acts also provide for the proceedings in the superior court of Grand Rapids to ascertain the amount of compensation to be awarded by a jury to be summoned in the cause in said court, who are empowered to hear, try, and determine such damages in one proceeding, and, when such damages are ascertained, the clerk of that court is to certify the same to the common council whose duty it then is to define a district in the city which in their judgment is benefited by said improvement out of which such damages arose, and to cause the damages so ascertained to be assessed upon such district, in proportion, as near as may be, to the advantage or benefit to each lot. The assessment is to be made, and the amount levied, in the same manner as other improvements; and all the provisions of the charter of the city relative to such assessments, and the collection thereof, and the sale, and redemption from sale, are to apply thereto. Such damages, when collected, are to be paid over to the persons to whom the same were awarded. The claims so presented to the superior court came on to be heard, and were tried as one cause by one jury, and damages were awarded to the claimants in the aggregate of $2,830; whereupon the common council levied an assessment against a district they deemed benefited by such regrade, and are now attempting to collect said damages. The bill is filed to restrain the collection. Complainants claim that these assessments are void for the reason (1) that the law under which the parties obtained judgment against the city is unconstitutional; (2) that the judgments so obtained are void; (3) that the assessments are void.

Under the first claim, it is contended by counsel that the amendment of the charter of the city introduces matter foreign to the original object of the charter. The charter of Grand Rapids (Local Acts 1877, p. 158) contained no provision giving parties damages on account of regrading a street. The charter was amended in 1881. Local Acts 1881, p. 240. This amendment gave parties damages on account of regrading of streets, and provided that such damages should be taken into consideration by the board of review and equalization at the time of making their assessment roll, and, if the damages exceeded the benefits derived, they should be collected as other taxes, and should be assessed upon all the taxable property of that particular ward. In 1883 the charter was again amended. Local Acts 1883 p. 516. This amendment provided that the damages on account of any regrade of a street should be estimated by a jury of five freeholders, and that said damages should be assessed and collected in the same manner as other taxes on all the taxable property of the city. The charter was again amended in 1885. Local Acts 1885, p. 85. This amendment provided that the claimants should file their claims against the city in the superior court, and the city attorney should be notified, and it is made his duty to appear for the city; that the issue should be between the claimant or claimants jointly and the city; and that a jury of 12 freeholders should ascertain the damages, which should then be assessed by the common council upon a district deemed by the council benefited by such regrade. This amendment so enlarged section 2 of title 6 of the act that the legislature in 1887 embodied the amendment of 1885 in seven new sections. Local Acts 1887, p. 509. The act now stands as in the amendment of 1885, except that...