Skip to main content
· 9/15/1870

Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railroad v. City of Chicago

Citations

  • 56 Ill. 454

Syllabus

<p>1. Special assessments in Chicago—hy whom, to he determined — validity of an ordinance in that regard. Upon an application for judgment upon a special assessment for the curbing and filling of a certain street in the city of Chicago, it appeared that, before the passage of the ordinance ordering the improvement, a considerable portion of it had been done by private individuals, of their own motion. The ordinance directed the improvement to be made, “ excepting such portions of the above described work which have been already done in a suitable manner.” There was no attempt, in any stage of the proceedings, by the council or.the board of public works, to define, by any public act, what portion of the work had been done in a suitable manner: Held, the ordinance was void, because the responsibility of directing the mode, manner and extent of such improvements is with the common council, and this was an attempt to vest a discretion in that regard in the board of public works.</p> <p>2. Same — of evidence admissible — to show fraud in the assessment. It is competent, on an application for judgment upon such an assessment, for an objector to prove that the assessment was made as if no part of the work had been previously done, as showing the fraud and injustice of the assessment. But proof of that fact was unnecessary because the ordinance was void without it.</p> <p>3. Same—of arrangements between the Bom'd of Public Works and individuals. It was also competent, in such case, to show that the Board of Public Works made arrangements with some of the parties who had voluntarily done the work thus embraced in the assessment, and who were in no way entitled to be allowed any thing for it, by which they were to be assessed a certain sum, and to be allowed for the work done by them as a setoff against the assessment. If such a setoff were allowable, the common council, not the Board of Public Works, was the proper authority to make the arrangement.</p>

Judges: McAllister

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.