Spear v. Drainage Commissioners

Citations

• 113 Ill. 632
• 1885 Ill. LEXIS 735

Syllabus

<p>1. Costs—apportionment, on appeal. On the trial of an appeal in the county court from a special assessment under the Drainage act, the assessment on appellant’s land, was reduced from $302.50 to $250. On appellant’s motion to apportion the costs, the court ordered and adjudged that he pay two-thirds of the costs: Held, that this was not such an abuse of the discretion of the court as to justify a reversal.</p> <p>2. Evidence—opinions of witnesses as to benefits from drainage. Persons residing in the neighborhood of lands proposed to be improved by drainage, are competent witnesses to give their opinions as to how much such land will be benefited by the proposed drainage, on the trial of an appeal from a special assessment, without its being first shown that they have some special knowledge or training on the subject.</p> <p>3. Same—opinions of non-expert witnesses, generally. The opinions of non-professional witnesses about the ordinary affairs of life are admissible in evidence in all eases where, from the nature of the question involved, its answer necessarily depends upon mere opinion. This is peculiarly so in respect to questions of value, time, distance, weight, etc.</p> <p>4. Drainage—elements of benefits to land. On the trial of an appeal from the assessment of benefits to a party’s land by a proposed drainage, the jury may take into consideration not only the benefit to the party’s land assessed, by the drainage of the same, but also the benefit he may derive by the drainage of a slough which separates him from his other land, and thereby obviates the necessity of his bridging the slough to reach such other land; and there is no error in the admission of evidence showing such additional benefit,.</p>