State ex rel. Moore v. Mayor
| Decision Date | 13 November 1894 |
| Citation | 88 Wis. 599,60 N.W. 1001 |
| Parties | STATE EX REL. MOORE v. MAYOR, ETC., OF CITY OF ASHLAND. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from circuit court, Ashland county; John K. Parish, Judge.
Certiorari proceedings by the state of Wisconsin on the relation of Charles M. Moore against the mayor and common council of the city of Ashland to review a special assessment. There was a judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed.J. J. Miles and H. L. Sanborn, for the State.
George P. Rossman and Lewis & Briggs, for respondents.
The relator sued out a writ of certiorari to review and reverse certain special assessment proceedings whereby a special assessment had been charged against his lots in the city of Ashland for the paving of the street in front of the lots. The action was tried upon the return to the writ made by the city clerk. Numerous irregularities in the proceedings were relied on by the relator to substantiate his contention. We shall discuss but one of these irregularities, which seems to us fatal to the assessment.
The steps necessary to make a valid assessment for the paving of a street against abutting lots are found in chapter 17 of the charter of the city of Ashland. Laws 1889, c. 27. The provisions are, in brief, that streets may be paved, and the expense charged to abutting lots in proportion to the benefits accruing to the lots; that before any street is ordered to be paved the board of public works shall view the premises, ascertain the entire cost and determine the amount of damages and benefits accruing to each abutting lot, and file a report showing these facts in their office; that they shall give notice by publication that such report is open for review at their office, and will so remain for 20 days, and appoint a time for hearing objections thereto; that after such hearing they shall make their final and corrected report, and file the same with the city clerk; that this report shall be laid before the common council at their next regular meeting, and may be confirmed or corrected or referred back to the board for further consideration, and when finally confirmed the city clerk shall give notice by publication that a final determination as to the benefits to be assessed against abutting real estate has been made; that appeals may be taken from such determination by any person aggrieved; that bids shall be advertised for by the board of public works, and the contract let by the board; that,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kansas City v. Bacon
... ... sixth of June, 1895. Ewing v. Hoblitzelle, 85 Mo ... 76; State ex rel. v. Railroad, 117 Mo. 1; State ... ex rel. v. Field, 99 Mo ... 429; Limbermann v ... Milwaukee, 89 Wis. 336; State ex rel. v. Mayor, ... 88 Wis. 599; State v. Hudson, 29 N. J. L. 104; ... State ex ... ...
-
Swayne v. City of Hattiesburg
... ... of the state which is unlimited ... 2 ... EMINENT DOMAIN. Inhibition ... of repair was in the board of mayor and aldermen and could ... not be delegated by them to street ... 379; ... Fraser v. Pittsburg, 41 Pa.Super. 103; ... State ex rel. Moore v. Ashland, 88 Wis ... 599, 60 N.W. 1001." ... See, ... ...
-
In re North Terrace Park
...given by the charter." See, also, to same effect: Liebermann v. City of Milwaukee, 89 Wis. 336, 61 N. W. 1112; State v. City of Ashland, 88 Wis. 599, 60 N. W. 1001; State v. City of Hudson, 29 N. J. Law, 104; State v. Mayor, etc., of Jersey City, 36 N. J. Law, 410; Dill. Mun. Corp. (4th Ed.......
-
Capps v. Judsonia & Steprock Road Improvement District
...for by section 9 of the act was published. Cooley on Taxation, 3rd ed. 1252 and cases cited; Id. 1254 and cases cited; Id. 1257-1258; 88 Wis. 599; 50 N.Y. 502; 9 253: 9 Standard Encyc. of Proc. 1158; 160 Pa. 499; 51 N.J.L. 267; 63 N.J.L. 202; 54 Cal. 536; 13 Ark. 198; 15 Id. 43-49; 15 Am. a......