Valley Farms Co of Yonkers v. Westchester County

Decision Date19 February 1923
Docket NumberNo. 136,136
Citation261 U.S. 155,67 L.Ed. 585,43 S.Ct. 261
PartiesVALLEY FARMS CO. OF YONKERS v. WESTCHESTER COUNTY
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Mr. Robt. C. Beatty, of New York City, for plaintiff in error.

[Argument of Counsel from pages 155-158 intentionally omitted] Messrs. Wm. A. Davidson, of Port Chester, N. Y., and Charles M. Carter, of White Plains, N. Y., for defendant in error.

Mr. Justice McREYNOLDS delivered the opinion of the Court.

Plaintiff in error, a New York corporation, seeks cancellation of an assessment of taxes upon its real property to pay for construction and operation of the Bronx Valley sewer. Westchester county, a necessary party under the local statute, demurred to the complaint upon the ground that it states no cause of action. The trial court over ruled the demurrer. The Appellate Division reversed the judgment (Valley Farms Co. of Yonkers v. City of Yonkers, 193 App. Div. 433, 184 N. Y. Supp. 300), and the Court of Appeals affirmed this action, without opinion (231 N. Y. 558, 132 N. E. 887).

The complaint alleges——

Plaintiff in error owns certain designated lands in Westchester county assessed for taxes for the year 1918 for the benefit of the Bronx Valley sewer.

That under chapter 646, New York Laws of 1905, entitled 'An act to provide for the construction and maintenance of a sanitary trunk sewer and sanitary outlet sewer in the county of Westchester, and to provide means for the payment therefor,' and sundry amendments thereto, especially chapter 646, Laws of 1917, the Legislature attempted to designate the area benefited by the trunk and outlet sewers and to provide for taxing all property therein. The trunk sewer is 11 3/4 miles long; the outlet sewer 3 miles. Both are wholly within Westchester county. The former lies along the Bronx river. At a point near the south line of the county it connects with the outlet sewer, which extends thence westwardly under two high ridges and across Tibbetts Valley to the Hudson river.

That the sewer system carries house drainage only—no surface water, and throughout its entire course the grade is downward. The sewage flows by gravity. There are no pumping stations.

That east of and near Hudson river a high ridge runs north and south. Immediately east of this lies Tibbetts Valley; further east there is a second north and south ridge; then comes Bronx Valley, shut in on the east by a third ridge. The natural drainage of Bronx Valley is southerly into East river; Tibbet § Valley also drains southerly, but into Harlem river. No natural drainage connection exists between the two valleys; they are separated throughout their entire length by the second ridge.

That the outlet sewer, through which the whole system discharges, extends from the trunk sewer in Bronx Valley under the second ridge a great depth below the surface, thence across Tibbetts Valley and under the first ridge, also at great depth, to the Hudson river. Any connection with this sewer from Tibbetts Valley must be made therein, and lands there cannot be connected at all with the trunk sewer.

That about 2,500 acres—Lincoln Park section—of Tibbetts Valley is now connected with the outlet sewer; no other lands therein can use it, unless and until a connecting line, 4 miles long, is constructed, at a probable cost of $300,000.

That notwithstanding this limited possible use Tibbetts Valley is assessed to meet the cost of the entire system, just as the lands in Bronx Valley. Taxes for construction and maintenance are based wholly upon assessed valuations for general purposes. Each lot is taxed according to value and irrespective of benefits received. No power is conferred to reduce assessments in one section not benefited equally with others.

That the district was defined by the amendment of 1917, 12 years after the original act and 5 years after completion of the sewers. The first act limited the total cost to $2,000,000 and provided that commissioners should determine the benefited area after opportunity for hearings. Amendments have changed these fundamental provisions; the total cost exceeds $3,250,000, and the boundaries have been designated without notice to owners.

That the challenged assessments are upon valuations of both land and improvements and disproportionate to benefits. The board of supervisors is required to adopt a budget, which includes unconstitutional and unlawful items—among them cost of litigation and contingent fund for deficiencies.

That the act as amended prohibits assessments against lands within the sewer district when also in Mt. Vernon, but directs that a corresponding sum shall be paid by levy upon all property, real and personal, within that city.

That plaintiff's lands have been illegally assessed. The act as amended violates the Fourteenth Amendment, by depriving plaintiff of property without due process of law and without just compensation, and by denying it equal protection of the laws. The assessments are a cloud upon plaintiff's title and greatly depreciate market values. There is no adequate remedy at law.

The prayer is for a decree declaring the assessments void, directing their cancellation and restraining collection, and for general relief.

Counsel for plaintiff in error states that:

'The question here involved is whether the statutes of the state of New York, under which the Bronx Valley sewer assessments were imposed over a large area of many square miles, in Westchester county, New York, are in contravention of due process of law under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.'

The argument proceeds thus——

The sewer system, intended for house drainage only, consists of a trunk sewer 11 3/4 miles long, in the Bronx Valley, connected with an outlet sewer extending westward 3 miles to the Hudson river. The act of 1905—chapter 646—provided that commissioners should prepare a map of the assessment district after notice to owners and opportunity to be heard. The supplemental act of 1917 chapter 646—disregards this map, substitutes definite boundaries and directs assessments upon all lands therein according to value, including improvements; all parcels to be...

To continue reading

Request your trial
104 cases
  • Yazoo & M. V. R. Co. v. Board of Mississippi Levee Com'rs
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • May 6, 1940
    ...... from the circuit court of Washington county HON. S. F. DAVIS,. Judge. . . Action. by the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Company against. the Board of Mississippi Levee ...254, 36 S.Ct. 58, 60 L.Ed. 266; Valley Farms Co. v. Westchester County, 261. U.S. 155, 43 S.Ct. 261, 67 ......
  • Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. City of Lakeland
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • August 1, 1927
    ...... Fla. 349] Appeal from Circuit Court, Polk County; H. C. Petteway, judge. . . COUNSEL . . ...379, 45 S.Ct. 136, 69. L.Ed. 335; Valley Farms Co. of Yonkers v. Westchester. County, 261 U.S. ......
  • Dinneen v. Rider
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Maryland
    • February 11, 1927
    ...Ocean City, 118 Md. 114, 119, 84 A. 262; Mitchell v. U. S., 267 U. S. 341, 45 S. Ct. 293, 69 L. Ed. 644; Valley Farms Co. v. Westchester, 261 U. S. 155, 162, 43 S. Ct. 261, 67 L. Ed. 5. The final grounds of challenge to the validity of the act are that it authorizes the issuance of bonds fo......
  • Lee v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • January 2, 1940
    ...... [141 Fla. 548] Appeal from Circuit Court, Leon County; E. C. Love, Judge. . . COUNSEL . . . ... repeated decisions here this is not essential. Valley. Farms Co. v. Westchester County, 261 U.S. 155, 43 S.Ct. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT