Tillman v. City Of Valdosta

• Decision Date: 15 October 1924
• Docket Number: (No. 4426.)
• Citation: 159 Ga. 105,125 S.E. 71
• Parties: TILLMAN et al. v. CITY OF VALDOSTA.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

159 Ga. 105

125 S.E. 71

TILLMAN et al.

v.CITY OF VALDOSTA.

(No. 4426.)

Supreme Court of Georgia.

Oct. 15, 1924.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error from Superior Court, Lowndes County; W. E. Thomas, Judge.

Suit by H. F. Tillman and others against the City of Valdosta. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs bring error. Affirmed.

H. F. Tillman and other residents and property owners of the city of Valdosta brought their equitable petition against the city, seeking to restrain and enjoin it and its officers from the commission of certain acts in their petition complained of. The case stated by the petition as amended is, in substance, as follows: The mayor and council of the city of Valdosta, purporting to act under the provisions of an act of the General Assembly of Georgia, approved August 6, 1921 (Ga. Laws 1921, p. 1106), determined by resolution to pave certain streets and alleys in the city. The preliminary steps were tak en in the several paving projects, and on the 18th day of July, 1922, a resolution was passed by the mayor and council assessing the owners of property abutting on the said several streets with the cost of said paving. In so far as is related to Park avenue in said city, where a majority of the complainants own property, the assessments were as follows: W. C. McKey, 1541/2 feet, $820.39; E. L. Ivey, 1541/2 feet, $820.39; H. F. Tillman, 309 feet, $1,640.79; J. C. G. Brooks, 154 1/2 feet, $820.39; E. E. Quinker, 164 1/2 feet, $873.49; and W. F. Etheridge, 150 feet, $796.50. It is further shown that Park avenue, as thus proposed to be paved, is located approximately two miles from the courthouse in the city, and extends from Oak street on the west to Patterson street on the east, and that the portion thereof to be paved is only a short segment of said Park avenue. Neither Patterson street at the point of intersection with Park avenue, nor Oak street at the point of intersection with Park avenue, is paved, and all of the lots particularly referred to, except the lots of W. F. Etheridge and E. E. Quinker, are vacant lots. All of the lots referred to are particularly described, and the market value of said lots before said pavement is laid is set out. The amount of the assessment charged to each of the lots is likewise set out, and it is alleged by the plaintiffs that the lots particularly referred to as belonging to them, as well as all other lots on Park avenue, would not be enhanced in value by reason of the pavement more than 25 per cent. of the cost assessed against said lots, respectively. To be exact, it is alleged that the market value of the McKey lot, before the proposed improvement is made, is $2,500, and that the market value of said lot would not be increased in any sum by reason of the pavement proposed to be laid, notwithstanding the fact that the assessment levied against the same is $820.39. It is also alleged that the reasonable market value of the Ivey lot, before the proposed pavement is laid, is $1,300, and that the market value of said lot would not be increased by reason of said proposed pavement in excess of $350. Substantially, the same allegations are made with reference to the H. F. Tillman lots, and with reference to all of the lots particular facts are alleged, tending to show that the several assessments levied against the lots are in excess of the benefit which will be received by reason of the said proposed pavement. In the case of the McKey lot, according to the allegations of the petition, the cost of the improvements will be $820.39 in excess of the benefit received, amounting to practically one third of the value of the property. In the case of the Ivey and Tillman vacant lots, it is shown that the cost of the proposed improvement will be approximately $475 perlot of 154 1/2 feet in excess of the benefit received, or practically one-fourth of the value of said lots. As to the improved lots it is shown that the cost of said improvement will be approximately $475 in excess of the benefit received, and in each case this sum will be a large portion of the actual market value of the property assessed. In general, it is alleged that the property on Park avenue and the other streets to be improved, taken as a whole, will not be enhanced in value by reason of the proposed improvement in excess of 25 per cent. of the cost thereof.

It is further shown that the mayor and council, purporting to follow the terms of the act of 1921, above referred to, have caused street improvement bonds to be issued in an aggregate sum covering the assessment levied against the property abutting on Park avenue and Webster and South Toombs streets, amounting to the total sum of $41,250. The mayor and council were unable to dispose of the said bonds in the open market, and. having failed to find a purchaser prior to the filing of this suit, determined to have and cause the city of Valdosta to purchase the street improvement bonds itself with funds heretofore levied and collected from its ad valorem taxes from year to year and set aside as the city's sinking fund, with which to pay...