City of Huntington v. Brown

95 N.E. 232, 175 Ind. 709, 1911 Ind. LEXIS 85
Indiana Supreme Court·Decided May 31, 1911·No. No. 21,915·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Monks, J.

Appellee filed a verified petition under tlie second provision oí section 111 oí the act of 1905 (Acts 1905 p. 219, §8710 Burns 1908), asking the appointment of three apiwaisers to reassess the benefits to her real estate on the ground that the amount assessed against it for the improvement of a street of the city “was excessive,” etc. Appraisers were appointed who reduced the amount of appellee’s assessment. Judgment for costs was rendered against appellant.

It has been held by this court that no appeal lies in such proceeding. City of Seymour v. Jordan (1909), 173 Ind. 717; Randolph v. City of Indianapolis (1909), 172 Ind. 510; Wilson v. City of Indianapolis (1909), 172 Ind. 719; City of Indianapolis v. Barnett (1909), 172 Ind. 720; Cook v. City of Butler (1909), 172 Ind. 720. Upon the authority of the cases cited the appeal is dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

City of Huntington v. Brown, 95 N.E. 232, 175 Ind. 709, 1911 Ind. LEXIS 85 (Ind. 1911).

95 N.E. 232 (City of Huntington v. Brown) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Farnham v. Schneider
96 N.E. 173 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1911)
Holderman v. Town of North Manchester
96 N.E. 29 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1911)