Smith v. City of Boston
Decision Date | 04 January 1907 |
Citation | 194 Mass. 31,79 N.E. 786 |
Parties | SMITH v. CITY OF BOSTON. |
Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Wilfred Bolster, for plaintiff.
Philip Nichols, for defendant.
In view of the decisions of this court, it is not now disputed that the statutes under which the assessment in question was laid were unconstitutional and void so far as they purported to authorize such an assessment. St. 1891, p. 880, c. 323; Lorden v. Coffey, 178 Mass. 489, 60 N.E. 124; Harwood v. St. Com'rs, 183 Mass. 348, 67 N.E 362; St. 1892, p. 492; White v. Gove, 183 Mass. 333 67 N.E. 359; St. 1897, p. 396, c. 426; Sears v. St Com'rs, 173 Mass. 350, 53 N.E. 876. And it was decided in Dexter v. Boston, 176 Mass. 247, 57 N.E. 379, 79 Am. St. Rep. 306, that under such circumstances a sewer assessment which has been paid, as here, under protest, may be recovered back in an action of contract. Such assessments have been not infrequently avoided on collateral proceedings. Lorden v. Coffey, 178 Mass. 489, 60 N.E. 124; Ahearn v. County of Middlesex, 182 Mass. 518, 65 N.E. 905; White v. Gove, 183 Mass. 333, 67 N.E. 359. These principles would be sufficient to entitle the plaintiff to recover if nothing more appeared.
But this assessment was made in August, 1898; and in July, 1904, one Harwood, the owner of other land affected thereby, brought a petition for a writ of certiorari to quash the assessment, upon the same grounds which are now relied upon; and this court, though assuming the validity of those contentions, declined to issue the writ and dismissed the petition, holding that certiorari was not a writ of right, and that in view of the petitioner's laches and the circumstances of that case, substantial justice did not require the quashing of the assessment. Harwood v. Donovan, 188 Mass. 487, 74 N.E. 914. The defendant's counsel now contends that the decision of that case was tantamount to a judgment sustaining the validity of the assessment by which all parties, including the plaintiff in the case at bar, are bound. He relies upon some expressions in the opinion of the court in the cases of Brewer v. Boston, Clinton & Fitchburg R. R., 113 Mass. 52, 57, and Taber v. New Bedford, 135 Mass. 162, 165. He argues further that the plaintiff must show that this assessment was void not only when laid, but also on the day of its payment in October, 1904, and that on this last date, though vulnerable at first, it had under the decision of this court in Harwood v. Donovan, ubi supra, become crystallized by lapse of time and general acquiescence into complete validity.
The fallacy of the defendant's argument is that it rests upon the assumption that the court by its decision in Harwood v Donovan sustained the validity of the assessment in question. But this is not so; on the contrary, the court assumed its invalidity and simply declined to quash it upon the request of that petitioner. If the assessment had been merely voidable and so good until it should be quashed, doubtless this result would have taken nothing from its validity and would have left it in full force and effect. But it was more than voidable; it was void from the beginning, as appears by the cases already referred to. The superintendent of streets had no jurisdiction to make this order. The effect of the decision in Harwood v. Donovan was simply to leave the assessment in its original position, not to endow it with any new strength. This order stands on exactly the same footing as an order made by county commissioners; and the distinction between an order or adjudication of such a tribunal which is only voidabel and one which is utterly void was pointed out in the recent case of Ahearn v. County of Middlesex, 182 Mass. 518, 65...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Wheatland v. City of Boston
...Boston, 6 Gray, 31; Goodrich v. Lunenburg, 9 Gray, 38; Gerry v. Stoneham, 1 Allen, 319; Loud v. Charlestown, 99 Mass. 208; Smith v. Boston, 194 Mass. 31, 79 N.E. 786. And would seem to follow that a statute like this must prevent, after the lapse of the specified time, an action to recover ......
-
L'homme v. Town of Winchendon
...v. Watertown, 141 Mass. 317-319, 5 N. E. 152;Stowell v. Board of Public Works, 184 Mass. 416, 418, 68 N. E. 675;Smith v. City of Boston, 194 Mass. 31, 79 N. E. 786; Selectmen of Holliston v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Co., 195 Mass. 299, 302, 81 N. E. 204;Whitten v. City of Ha......
-
L'Homme v. Town of Winchendon
... ... across a highway. For the meaning of the word ... "highway," see Boston & Albany Railroad v ... Boston, 140 Mass. 87; Wood v. Concord, 268 Mass. 185 ... The trial ... avoid any question of jurisdiction to do what might seem ... advisable. Bigelow v. City Council of Worcester, 169 ... Mass. 390, 393, and cases cited. Commonwealth v. Boston & ... 141 Mass. 317 , 319. Stowell v. Board of Public ... Works, 184 Mass. 416, 418. Smith v. Boston, 194 ... Mass. 31 ... Selectmen of Holliston v. New York Central & ... Hudson River ... ...
-
Ford v. Erskine
...set out above, works no estoppel of the plaintiff. See Brown v. County Com'rs, 12 Metc. (Mass.) 208, 209. See, also, Smith v. Boston, 194 Mass. 31, 34, 79 N. E. 786. As to the liability of the defendants: One was a member of the board of county commissioners laying out the way. Whatever he ......