Skip to main content
· 6/19/1894

Vane v. City of Evanston

Citations

  • 150 Ill. 616
  • 37 N.E. 901

Syllabus

<p>1. Special assessments — sufficiency of description of proposed improvement. A substantial compliance with the statute, which requires the ordinance for a local improvement to specify “the nature, character, locality and description of the improvement,” will be sufficient.</p> <p>2. An objection to an ordinance for.the paving of a street, that it fails to_ provide for man-holes and catch-basins to convey from the pavement the surface water, dirt, etc., where a sewer has already been constructed in the street sufficient for the purpose, will not avail to defeat the assessment.</p> <p>3. Same — discretion as to extent of local improvement. The municipal authorities of cities and villages are made, by the statute, the judges of the utility of an improvement upon streets, and whether such improvement shall be treated as a local improvement in raising funds to pay for it, and their decision on these questions is final. Where the ordinance provides for an improvement complete in itself, it will not follow that the ordinance is to be deemed void because the utility of the improvement might be enhanced by the addition of something more which has been omitted.</p> <p>4. Same— personal view by jury. In a proceeding to confirm a special assessment by a city or village for a local improvement, the court has the power, in the exercise of a reasonable discretion, to permit, in proper cases, a view of the property assessed, or the locus in quo, by the jury, on the issue of benefits to the property specially assessed.</p> <p>5. PbactiOE — viewbyjury—when allowed. At common law a personal view of premises was not granted as a matter of right, but the power-rested in the sound discretion of the court, to be exercised whenever, in the nature of the case, it became necessary or important to a clearer Understanding of the issues, and to enable the jury to properly apply the evidence.</p> <p>6. The design of the practice of allowing a view by the jury was to enable them better to unde

Judges: Shope

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.