City of Wabash v. Alber

88 Ind. 428
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 15, 1882
DocketNo. 4459
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 88 Ind. 428 (City of Wabash v. Alber) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
City of Wabash v. Alber, 88 Ind. 428 (Ind. 1882).

Opinion

Franklin, C.

— This was an action brought by the appellee Alber against the appellant and others, for damages resulting from a change of grade of a street running in front of the premises of the appellee, and for an injunction to restrain the-collection of estimates therefor by precept. The case was commenced in Wabash cou’nty, and the venue changed to the Kosciusko Common Pleas Court.

The complaint sets up the fact that the present city of Wabash was, in the year 1855, incorporated as a town under the act of the General Assembly of June 11th, 1852, and as such town it established the grade of Wabash street in front of the premises or lot owned by appellee, and, by ordinance passed by the president and trustees thereof, compelled the owners of the property fronting on said street to improve said street, and bear the expense thereof, and that, about the year 1863, the appellee, in strict compliance with said town ordinance, improved said street and sidewalk, at great expense, in front of his said lot; and that he had put up, prior to the improvement of said street, large and expensive buildings and improvements on said lot; that afterwards, about April, 1866, the town of Wabash was incorporated as a city, under the act of the General Assembly of December 20th, 1865, for the in[429]*429-corporation of cities; that on the 9th clay of July, 1869, the common council of said city pretended to change the grade of said street, and to establish another grade, whereby the grade of said street in front of said lots was reduced below the existing grade an average depth of five and one-half feet, to the great injury of plaintiff, the appellee; that it assumed to change the grade without first assessing or tendering the damages; that the contract was let without a quorum of the council, in fact, being present, by the record; that the w'ork was done without the consent of the appellee, and that precepts had been issued to collect the costs of said change; and praying an injunction to restrain all further proceedings until the determination of the suit for damages. Copies of ordinances and contract were filed as exhibits.

To this complaint a deznun’er was sustained as to all of the defendants except the appellant, and overruled, as to it, to which ruling appellazit excepted. The appellant filed an answer to the complaint, and, after a demuz’rer was sustained to it, filed amended second and third paragzaphs.

The second paz’agz’aph alleges that the city of Wabash was incorporated under the genezal act of 1865 for the incorporation of cities; that at the time of the grievazzees of which complaint is made it was acting under that law; that the grade of the stz’eet nazned in the coznplaint never had been established by it, but the grade of which coznplaint is made was the only one ever established by the appellant; that the street was the principal one of the city, was much used, and that the grade established was proper, and necessary to make the street accessible and passable; that a petition from two-thirds of the lot owziers was pz-esented to the common council pz’ior to the order establishing the _ grade, and that the order was made by a unanimous vote of the comzzion council; that no objection was made by the appellee to the work of grading the street until after it had been done.

The third paragz’aph of the amended answer also alleges the facts substantially as stated izz the second paragraph, and [430]*430avers that the pi’emises alleged to have been injured were held by the appellee for business purposes, and that, instead of being injured by the grading of the street, his property was greatly benefited.

The fourth paragraph of the answer alleges that appellee negligently permitted his building to stand idle and unoccupied, and that he could, at a small expense, have rendered it habitable and fit for use, and thus have prevented any injury from resulting.

The fifth paragraph of the answer alleged that the appellee was benefited and not irijuredby the change of grade.

The demurrers to the second and fourth paragraphs were sustained, and as to the third and fifth overruled, and exceptions were properly taken.

The appellant also filed thirteen additional paragraphs, numbered from six to nineteen inclusive. Of these paragraphs the court held all good upon demurrer except the sixth, and to this paragraph the demurrer was sustained. This paragraph denied that there was ever any incorporated town of Wabash.

After the reply was filed the appellant filed a twentieth paragraph of answer, which averred that, instead of the alleged change of grade doing an injury to appellant’s property, it benefited it in the sum of $300.

The venue was then changed to Kosciusko county, where appellant filed two additional paragraphs, the twenty-first and twenty-second. The twenty-first paragraph of the answer sets out the proceedings of the common council, and alleges that the appellee stood by, without objection, and saw the work done, and insists that he was, by his standing by with knowledge, estopped to afterward complain. The twenty-second paragraph of the answer alleges that the grade of the street was ordered upon the petition of two-thirds of the property-owners, whose names are given, and that they, the petitioners, are the parties against whom the appellee should proceed. Demurrers filed by the appellee to these paragraphs were sustained, and exceptions properly taken.

[431]*431There was a trial by jury, and verdict for the appellee, motion for a new trial made, overruled and excepted to, and judgment was rendered for the appellee.

Errors are assigned calling in question the overruling of the demurrer to the complaint, the overruling of appellant’s motion to certify the cause to the circuit court, the sustaining of the demurrer to the second and fourth paragraphs of the answei’, the sustaining of the demurrer to the sixth paragraph of the answer, the overruling of the demurrer to' the amendment to the complaint, the overruling of the motion to strike out the amendment to the complaint, the sustaining of the demurrer to the twenty-first paragraph of the answer, the overruling of the motion for a new trial, and the overruling of the motion in arrest of judgment.

This case was decided by this court May 22d, 1876. A petition for a rehearing was filed, and, at the request of-the parties,, it was delayed from time to time until October 25th, 1881,. when the petition was granted, and the case has been resubmitted for decision, and appellant’s additional brief filed April 25th, 1883.

The principal question in the case is this: The authorities-of the incorporated toion of Wabash had established a grade of the streets in question, and they had been graded and improved according thereto about the year 1863, at the expense of the owners of abutting property, the plaintiff included y that in 1866 the incorporated town became a city, under the act of 1865, by the name of “ the City of Wabash,” and as such continues;

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

Related

Morris v. City of Indianapolis
94 N.E. 705 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1911)
Keehn v. McGillicuddy
44 N.E. 554 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1896)
City of Huntington v. Griffith
41 N.E. 8 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1895)
Baker v. Town of Shoals
33 N.E. 664 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1893)
City of Jeffersonville v. Myers
28 N.E. 999 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1891)
City of Valparaiso v. Adams
24 N.E. 107 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1890)
Henderson v. City of Minneapolis
20 N.W. 322 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1884)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
88 Ind. 428, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-wabash-v-alber-ind-1882.