Westenhaver v. Hoytsville (Vil.)

Citations

• 18 Ohio C.C. Dec. 357
• 8 Ohio C.C. (n.s.) 284

Syllabus

<p>MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS — SIDEWALKS.</p> <p>Parker, Haynes and Wildman, JJ.</p> <p>1. Sidewalks in Municipality — How Construction Controlled.</p> <p>Sidewalks in a municipality may be constructed under either the statute providing for the improvement of streets, etc. (Rev. Stat. 1536-210; Lan. 3600), or under the special section for the purpose (Rev. Stat. 1536-232; Lan. 3621). Municipalities are thus provided with an alternative procedure in the construction of sidewalks.</p> <p>2. Ordinance already Passed may Govern Under Rev. Stat. 1536-232 (Lan. 3621), for the Construction of Sidewalks.</p> <p>A general ordinance for the construction of sidewalks having been passed by the council of a municipality before the enactment of the new munici. pal code, including Rev. Stat. 1536-232 (Lan. 3621), no other or special ordinance is required.</p> <p>3. Sidewalk Construction not Controlled by Benefits nor Proportion of Cost to Value of Property.</p> <p>Under Rev. Stat. 1536-232 (Lan. 3621), the cost of the construction of a sidewalk may be assessed against the abutting property, regardless of benefits. ♦</p> <p>4. Evidence — Party Seeking to Enjoin Municipal' Assessment Has Burden of Proof.</p> <p>Where a property owner in a municipality seeks to enjoin the enforcement of an assessment against his property for improvements on the ground of irregularity in the procedure for the construction of the improvement and the imposition of the costs, the burden is on the plaintiff to show such irregularity and not on the municipality to show the regularity of such procedure.</p> <p>[Syllabus approved by the court.]</p>