Sheaff v. People ex rel. Colwell

Citations

• 87 Ill. 189

Syllabus

<p>1. Highway—no outlet to other roads. A road laid out by commissioners, under the statute, is a public highway, even though one end of the same terminates against private land, with no outlet. The statute must control against any contrary doctrine of the common law.</p> <p>2. Same-—defense to opening. It is no defense against a proceeding by mandamus to compel the commissioners of highways to open a public road established by them, that the same will not be fit for travel until bridges are built requiring a large sum of money, and that there are no funds to build the same. The command to open does not require the road to be put in good order. The question of the utility of the road is not involved in such suit.</p> <p>3. Same—agreement not to open till damages are paid. Where the damages for right of way for a road are agreed upon, and an order given for the same, and releases executed, the land owner relying on the orders, the commissioners of highways, on mandamus against them, will not he allowed to set up a verbal agreement made by them with the owner not to open the road until the damages should be paid, as such agreement is inconsistent with the order establishing the road. Such an agreement can not rest in parol.</p> <p>4. Mandamus — commissioners of highways as a party. Commissioners of highways being a quasi corporation, the naming of the individuals composing the body in a petition for mandamus may be regarded as surplusage. The proceeding is properly brought against them as “the commissioners of highways of the town of-naming the town.</p>