Michelet v. Board of Commissioners

Citations

• 21 N.M. 95
• 152 P. 1140
• 1915 N.M. LEXIS 80

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. .A petition for the establishment of a new highway is not rendered invalid by reason of the fact that it contains a description of the proposed highway, where it is only under the statute required to náme the termini of the road, and the viewers are required to lay out the way upon the most feasible route. Such viewers are not bound by the description in the petition, and the same may be disregarded as surplusage. P. 97</p> <p>2. Where a highway is properly laid out, according to the petition therefor between the termini named in such petition, the fact that it is extended beyond such termini over lands not owned by the objecting party does not invalidate the order opening such highway between the points named in the original petition. P. 98</p> <p>3. WThere a- party has_an adequate remedy at law, equity will not entertain jurisdiction, and, as a remonstrator had the right to review the amount of damage by appeal, such quéstion.; cannot .properly be relied upon in injunction.</p> <p>P. 99</p> <p>4. The report of the viewers is properly considered by the hoard of county commissioners at its next regular session after such report is filed with the cleric of such board,</p> <p>P. 100</p> <p>5. Section 2667, Code 1915, construed. Held, that such section only requires the payment, or tender, of the damages awarded prior to the actual taking of the property required.</p> <p>P. 100</p>