Thompson v. City of Alexandria

• Decision Date: 04 January 1955
• Docket Number: No. 8206,8206
• Parties: Raymond M. THOMPSON et al., Plaintiff-Appellees, v. CITY OF ALEXANDRIA, La. et al., Defendants-Appellants.
• Court: Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US

Page 584

77 So.2d 584

Raymond M. THOMPSON et al., Plaintiff-Appellees, v. CITY OF ALEXANDRIA, La. et al., Defendants-Appellants.

No. 8206.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit.

Jan. 4, 1955.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 31, 1955.

Frank H. Peterman, Alexandria, for appellants.

John R. Hunter, Jr., Alexandria, for appellees.

AYRES, Judge.

This suit was instituted by the plaintiffs, nine property owners in the 3200 block of Nelson Street in the City of Alexandria against the City and the Clerk of Court as ex-officio recorder for the purpose of having decreed illegal, null and void a local assessment ordinance and having erased from the records assessments against plaintiffs made pursuant to said ordinance. From a judgment in plaintiffs' favor, the defendants appealed.

Plaintiffs' property, abutting Nelson Street in the City of Alexandria, is located between Maryland Avenue and Texas Avenue. As such owners, they petitioned the city council in December, 1951, to have that part of the Street paved with concrete, together with the necessary curbs, gutters and drainage structures. The petition was approved by the city council March 2, 1953, plans were drawn by the city engineer, advertisements for bids were published, and the contract for the construction was awarded Lamkin Brothers Construction Company April 27, 1953. The work was reported by the city engineer as completed September 23, 1953, and the city council accepted it October 5, 1953, at which time local assessment Ordinance No. 594 was adopted, assessing the expense of the improvements against plaintiffs at a cost of $6.63 per front foot. Plaintiffs were notified of their assessments and they either paid same in cash or made a cash payment and executed paving notes for the balance.

Subsequent to the petition presented to the city council by plaintiffs, the property owners on Maryland Avenue presented a similar petition requesting the paving of that street from Jackson Street to Marye Street. This petition and the proceedings thereunder took a similar course as that of the Nelson Street petition culminating in an award and the execution of a contract for the construction of said improvements likewise to Lamkin Brothers Construction Company. The city engineer reported October 15, 1953, that the contract had been completed, which was followed by the preparation of an assessment ordinance assessing the property owners on Maryland Avenue for said paving at a cost of $9.85 per front foot. Before action was taken on the proposed ordinance, the property owners on Maryland Avenue protested the proposed assessments on the ground that said ordinance included an item for drainage structures on Nelson Street. Assessment Ordinance No. 597 was then prepared and adopted November 23, 1953, assessing the owners on Maryland Avenue for the cost of the paving on their street at the rate of $8.96 per front foot. The sum of $2,456 was deducted from the total cost of that project as reported by the city engineer, which he advised was the amount of cost for the drainage structures included in the specifications and contract on the Maryland Avenue project but which were laid alongside the paving on Nelson Street. The council, therefore, on December 7, 1953, adopted a supplemental assessment ordinance, No. 599, increasing the original assessments on Nelson Street by the aforesaid sum of $2,456, or $3.07 per front foot. This controversial item consists of the expense of laying a 24 inch concrete pipe from Maryland Avenue along the 3200 block of Nelson Street to Texas Avenue as a sub-drainage structure for connection with the sub-drainage system along Texas Avenue.

The Nelson Street project was first paved. The plans and specifications for that project did not include these subdrainage structures. The provisions for surface drainage, according to the testimony, was sufficient for the purpose of Nelson Street. The contract likewise did not include these sub-drainage structures.

In answer to an inquiry made by the...