Commissioners of the McGee Creek Levee & Drainage District v. Wabash Railway Co.

150 N.E. 259, 319 Ill. 379
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 16, 1925
DocketNo. 17010. Reversed and remanded.
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 150 N.E. 259 (Commissioners of the McGee Creek Levee & Drainage District v. Wabash Railway Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Commissioners of the McGee Creek Levee & Drainage District v. Wabash Railway Co., 150 N.E. 259, 319 Ill. 379 (Ill. 1925).

Opinions

Mr. Justice Heard

delivered the opinion of the court:

The McGee Creek Levee and Drainage District was organized as a drainage district in 1905. It embraces about 10,800 acres of land, one-third of which is in Brown county, the remaining two-thirds in Pike county. When the district was organized a levee was constructed, beginning about a quarter of a mile northeast of the northwest corner of section 23, in Brown county, and extending in an easterly direction about a mile to the west bank of the Illinois river, and was constructed. for the purpose of preventing the waters of Camp creek, which is immediately north of the levee, from overflowing the lands of the district. The levee then continues down the west bank of the Illinois river to McGee creek, where it turns and continues in a westerly and northwesterly direction along the north and east banks of the creek to a point about a quarter of a mile west of the center of section 9. The river levee is about seven miles in length and the McGee creek levee about four miles. At the time the district was organized a pumping station was built at the southeast corner of the district, and a main channel or ditch was built in a northerly direction about seven miles. Lateral ditches were also built. In 1914 funds were raised to build a pumping plant immediately north of the Wabash railroad right of way, on the west side of the river, and to construct a ditch, called the auxiliary main ditch, leading from the new pumping plant. The present proceedings were instituted by the commissioners of the district in the county court of Pike county, and resulted in an order of the county court confirming an assessment of $226,751.$2 against the lands of appellants and others in the district for the purpose of increasing the height of the levee, constructing certain ditches and increasing the capacity of the upper pumping plant. From this order three separate appeals were taken: one by the Wabash Railway Company, one by appellants Harry W. Dorwart and Henry C. Goebel, and one by the nineteen other appellants.

Appellants Dorwart and Goebel are the owners in common of 86 acres of land in the district, which was assessed $1872.44 but was reduced by the jury to $872.44, which amount was approved by the court in the order confirming the assessments. The uncontradicted evidence shows that about 80 acres of this tract is covered by water and is known as Barlow lake. This lake is about a quarter of a mile wide east and west and three-quarters of a mile in length north and south. It lies just west of the levee along the Illinois river and is separated from the levee only by a narrow fringe of land. It is five or six feet in depth, and at the average stage of the Illinois river its surface is below the surface of the river. The evidence shows that it was bought three years ago for hunting and fishing purposes, for which purposes it is best fitted, and with one exception it is the only lake remaining in that region valuable for hunting and fishing. Its value for that purpose is more than it would be for agricultural purposes even if successfully drained. The evidence shows that the drainage of the lake would wholly destroy its value for hunting and fishing and that the drainage work proposed would not fit the land for agricultural purposes, and that the proposed improvement, instead of benefiting the land and increasing its market value, would decrease the same. A special assessment must be spread so that no land will be burdened with more than its proportionate cost of the improvement, and in no case may the assessment exceed the benefits to be derived from the proposed improvement. (Little Beaver Drainage District v. Livingston, 270 Ill. 582.) The evidence in the case showed that the assessments against the lands of Dorwart and Goebel were in excess of the benefits to be derived from the proposed improvement, and the order of the county court must be reversed as to these appellants.

The amount assessed by the jury and confirmed by the order of the court against the Wabash Railway Company upon its right of way as benefits was $25,000. The Wabash right of way within the district consists of a strip between three and a half and four miles long and 100 feet in width, except at Perry Springs station, where for a distance of 100 feet the width is 1000 feet. There is an elevated embankment running a little northwesterly across the district; It averages about twelve feet in height. This embankment is riprapped with stone on the north side for a distance of 3.32 miles and 3.08 miles on the south side. The riprap starts at the base of the embankment and extends upward an average of ten feet. One of the engineers for the drainage district testified that he had made, estimates to determine what it would cost to replace the embankment in the event that it was destroyed, and he- estimated the cost of replacement at $98,000, while another of the district’s engineers fixed the cost at $97,800. The commissioners in their assessment roll assessed the right of way $35,000, $30,000 of which was for levee purposes and $5000 for drainage purposes, which assessment was reduced to $25,000. In making their assessment the commissioners assessed the rest of the land in the district for drainage purposes from $2.96 per acre to $13.96 per acre, depending upon the elevation of the land, while for the same purposes they assessed the right of way of the Wabash Railway Company at $102.04 an acre. The entire assessment authorized against the land in the district for levee purposes was $100,000, and of this $30,000 was assessed against the railway company by the commissioners. The jury in fixing the amount at $25,000 did not specify how much of this was for levee purposes and how much for drainage purposes, but as the evidence failed to show that the right of way, as right of way, would be benefited by the proposed improvement, it is probable that most, if not all, of the $25,000 was assessed against the railway company for levee purposes. The lands in the district other than the right of way were assessed for these purposes by the commissioners at a flat rate of $7.80 per acre, which would make a total assessment of those lands for drainage and levee purposes of from $10.76 per acre to $21.76 per acre, while the rate fixed in the confirmation order for these purposes against the right of way of the railway company amounts to $510.20 per acre. From the provisions of the act under which the drainage district was organized it is manifest that it was the intention of the act that land owners should pay their proportionate share of the cost of the improvement if their lands are benefited, and that railroad corporations whose road-beds or rights of way are benefited should contribute their proportionate share of the cost, and that the commissioners shall apportion all such benefits in their assessment roll, and on the trial the jury shall view the premises, and where the road-bed or right of way of a railroad corporation is benefited by the improvement they shall assess against the railroad company its proportionate share of the benefits. (Kickapoo Drainage District v. City of Mattoon, 284 Ill. 393.) In a proceeding of this kind, where a jury has been empaneled and ordered to make an assessment, there are only two issues to be submitted to the jury: (1) Was the property assessed more than it was benefited? (2) Was it assessed more than its proportionate share of the cost? (Inlet Swamp Drainage District v. Gehant, 286 Ill. 558; Savanna and York Drainage District v. DeLaVergne, 298 id.

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

Related

Sny Island Levee Drainage District v. Meyer
190 N.E.2d 356 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1963)
SNY ISLAND LEVEE DRAIN. DIST. v. Meyer
190 N.E.2d 356 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1963)
Commissioners of Drainage District No. 1 v. Goembel
50 N.E.2d 444 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1943)
Beaver Pond Drainage District v. Gray
173 N.E. 115 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1930)
Commissioners of McGee Creek Levee & Drainage District v. Sides
168 N.E. 283 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
150 N.E. 259, 319 Ill. 379, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commissioners-of-the-mcgee-creek-levee-drainage-district-v-wabash-ill-1925.