Town of Norwalk v. Podmore

• Decision Date: 13 June 1912
• Citation: 83 A. 629,85 Conn. 498
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Parties: TOWN OF NORWALK v. PODMORE et al.

83 A. 629

85 Conn. 498

TOWN OF NORWALK v. PODMORE et al.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

June 13, 1912

Appeal from Superior Court, Fairfield County; William S. Case Judge.

Application by the Town of Norwalk to assess damages sustained by Kate H Podmore and others through a taking of lands for bridge and park purposes. Judgment dismissing the application, and applicant appeals. Reversed and remanded.

John J. Walsh, of Norwalk, for appellant.

John C. Chamberlain, of Bridgeport, and Leo Davis, of Norwalk, for appellees.

THAYER, J.

This is an application by the town of Norwalk for the appointment of a committee to assess the defendants' damages for land taken for bridge and park purposes. The land taken is within a layout of the bridge and park referred to in an act of the Legislature entitled " An act concerning a new Washington street bridge and park in the town of Norwalk and the issue of bonds therefor." Special Laws, 1911, p 490. The application was brought by the bridge construction committee as agents and committee of the town, and alleges that the town, acting by them as its agents and committee has been unable to agree with the defendants as to the damage sustained by them by the layout of the bridge and park, within which the defendants' land is included and for which it is required. A motion to dismiss the application, upon the ground that the only authority to make such an application is vested in the selectmen of the town, and that the bridge construction committee possess no power in the matter of condemning land for the uses of said bridge or its approaches, was granted by the judge to whom the application was made.

The only question raised by the appeal is whether the bridge commissioners have the power to act as agent for the town in a proceeding of this character to take land for the bridge or its approaches. That they have such power where the land taken is for the park is not questioned.

The act in question empowers the town of Norwalk to construct an expensive drawbridge, with approaches thereto, over Norwalk river in place of an existing bridge and to acquire and own the land therefor; also, to establish, lay out, improve, and maintain a park, and to acquire and own the land therefor, being land which is described in the act and which adjoins the bridge and its approaches. It is provided in section 2 that " in case the town of Norwalk cannot agree with the claimants or the owners of land or buildings within the limits of the layout of said bridge, or the approaches thereto, as finally adopted, or said park, or can agree with some and not with others, as aforesaid, said town may proceed to condemn the land or buildings within said layout and said park in accordance with the provisions of the statutes relating to the condemnation of lands for highway purposes."

Section 5 provides that the " bridge construction committee and their successors, shall be the sole agents and committee of the town *** with full power to construct said bridge and its approaches *** and may acquire, for the use of the town or for the use of the contractor, lands or rights for a deviation bridge for the temporary accommodation of travel. *** And said committee shall be the sole agent of the town for acquiring the property and the rights for said park *** and may sell and dispose of the present bridge and draw, and all buildings on land acquired for said bridge or park, and, subject to the provisions of the act, may prescribe the form and conditions of said improvement bonds provided for by the act to determine the rate of interest which they shall bear, and may sell the same, depositing the proceeds thereof with the treasurer of said town and may make payment, out of the proceeds of said improvement bonds, from time to time, by its orders upon the town...