Neal v. Town of Decatur

82 S.E. 546, 142 Ga. 205, 1914 Ga. LEXIS 652
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJuly 25, 1914
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 82 S.E. 546 (Neal v. Town of Decatur) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Neal v. Town of Decatur, 82 S.E. 546, 142 Ga. 205, 1914 Ga. LEXIS 652 (Ga. 1914).

Opinion

Atkinson, J.

On July 19, 1910, a fi. fa. for the amount of an assessment for constructing a sewer was issued by the Town of Decatur against abutting land of D. 0. Neal, and duly levied on the property. The defendant filed an affidavit of illegality, denying the right of the town to levy an assessment against his property. One of the grounds of illegality was, that, on a former occasion, when the Town of Decatur desired a right of way through the property for location of a sewer, different from that for which the assessment was made, the officers of the municipality entered into an agreement with the defendant’s predecessor in title, whereby the property levied on would be exempt from all future sewer assessments, in consideration of the grant of the right of way; and, in pursuance of the agreement, the municipality accepted the right of way and constructed the sewer, and for a period of more than seven years has continuously enjoyed the easement, and thereby ratified and become es-topped from repudiating the contract for exemption from assessments for the cost of sewers. The other ground of illegality was that the sewer for which the assessment was made was impracticable for use on the defendant’s property, in that it was above the grade of the property on which his houses were located, and that, if his houses should be connected with the sewer, it would be injurious to the health of the occupants of the houses. Held:

1. The principles announced in Horkan v. City of Moultrie, 136 Ga. 561 (71 S. E. 785), are applicable to this ease. The alleged agreement was ultra vires and void, and, being so, could not be ratified by continued use, under the contract, of the sewer through the land by the municipality; nor would the benefit thereby received estop the municipality from subsequently setting up the invalidity of the contract.

2. The fact that the abutting property, in its present condition, may not be specially benefited by construction of the sewer would not render the assessment illegal. Georgia Railroad Co. v. Decatur, 137 Ga. 537 (73 S. E. 830, 40 L. R. A. (N. S.) 935).

3. The affidavit was properly dismissed on demurrer.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

City of Powder Springs v. WMM Properties, Inc.
325 S.E.2d 159 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1985)
Brown v. City of East Point
268 S.E.2d 912 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1980)
Simmons v. City of Clarkesville
216 S.E.2d 826 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1975)
Spoerl v. Township of Pennsauken
101 A.2d 855 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1954)
Barr v. City Council of Augusta
58 S.E.2d 820 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1950)
The J. S. H. Company v. City of Atlanta
17 S.E.2d 55 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1941)
City of Atlanta v. Johnson
11 S.E.2d 656 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1940)
Aven v. Steiner Cancer Hospital Inc.
5 S.E.2d 356 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)
City Council of Augusta v. Richmond County
173 S.E. 140 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1934)
Washington Water & Electric Co. v. Pope Manufacturing Co.
167 S.E. 286 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1932)
Caldwell v. City or Rome
162 S.E. 829 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1932)
White Provision Co. v. City of Atlanta
145 S.E. 109 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1928)
Bancroft v. Mayor of Wilmington
123 A. 602 (Court of Chancery of Delaware, 1924)
Mayor of Hogansville v. Planters Bank
108 S.E. 480 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1921)
Gainesville v. Dunlap
94 S.E. 247 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
82 S.E. 546, 142 Ga. 205, 1914 Ga. LEXIS 652, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/neal-v-town-of-decatur-ga-1914.