Taylor v. City & County of Honolulu ex rel. Brown

Citations

• 25 Haw. 58
• 1919 Haw. LEXIS 3

Syllabus

<p>Municipal Corporations-^-pií&Zíc improvement — contract.</p> <p>Allegations of slight variances from specifications which do not affect the character of the work are not facts sufficient to establish fraud in the performance of a contract of such a nature as to warrant the intervention of a court of equity and the granting of an injunction to restrain the collection of, the assessment.</p> <p>Same — same—assessment.</p> <p>An assessment will not as a rule be set aside for minor irregularities that in no way affect substantial rights of property owners.</p> <p>Same — same—Same—conclusiveness.</p> <p>Where a city is vested with power to determine what property is benefited by a local improvement and to assess the cost upon such property, its decision is conclusive except in case of fraud or mistake.</p> <p>Same — same—contract—acceptance.</p> <p>The acceptance of the contract by the engineer and by the board of supervisors must in the absence of fraud be regarded as conclusive.</p> <p>Same — same—assessment•—constitutionality.</p> <p>Neither the relative importance of the work to the value of the land assessed nor that the assessment'is unequal as regards the benefits conferred is a matter in which the local authorities are controlled by the Federal Constitution.</p>