Town of Kankakee v. Kankakee & Indiana Railroad

Citations

• 115 Ill. 88

Syllabus

<p>1. Suit in the name of a town—instituted without authority—dismissal for that cause. If a bill in chancery be brought in the name of a town without authority of the electors given at a town meeting, the court may properly dismiss the same on the motion of the defendants,—and this the court may do on its own motion, when its attention is called to the fact that the suit is being prosecuted without lawful authority.</p> <p>2. Same—by whom such suit may be authorized. Under our system of township organization there is no officer or board representing the corporate authority of a town. The electors alone represent it, and they can do so only through town meetings. Therefore, neither the supervisor nor the board of town auditors can lawfully authorize a suit in chancery to be brought in the corporate name of their town, or any other action except in the cases named in the statute.</p> <p>3. Injunction—to prevent invasion of the .rights of a town—and at whose instance. It is probable that in extreme cases of threatened invasion or destruction of the property rights of a town, any tax-payer who might thereby be affected in the burden of taxation may prevent such wrong by injunction.</p>