People ex rel. Greene v. Department of Public Works & Buildings

234 Ill. App. 111, 1924 Ill. App. LEXIS 255
CourtAppellate Court of Illinois
DecidedApril 30, 1924
DocketGen. No. 7,678
StatusPublished

This text of 234 Ill. App. 111 (People ex rel. Greene v. Department of Public Works & Buildings) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People ex rel. Greene v. Department of Public Works & Buildings, 234 Ill. App. 111, 1924 Ill. App. LEXIS 255 (Ill. Ct. App. 1924).

Opinions

Mr. Justice Niehaus

delivered' the opinion of the court.

In this case, a petition for mandamus by the People of the State of Illinois on the relation of James M. Greene and others, including residents and taxpayers of Wapella and Clinton in De Witt county, was filed in the Circuit Court of Sangamon county against the appellees, the Department of Public Works and Buildings, and Cornelius N. Miller, as Director of Public Works and Buildings, and Frank P. Sheets, as Superintendent of the Highways of the State. It is alleged in the petition that the appellees have materially and arbitrarily changed a part of route No. 2, one of the main routes provided for by the “Hard Beads Act” of 1917, namely, that part of the route which was designed to connect the Villages of Hey worth and Wapella with the City of Clinton; and that the changes were made in violation of the provisions of the Act referred to. The petition prays that the appellees may be compelled by mandamus to relocate that part of the route No. 2 designated, in such a manner as to comply with the provisions of the Act. A demurrer to the petition was interposed in the court below and was sustained by the court; and the court rendered judgment dismissing the petition and assessing costs against the relators. This appeal is prosecuted from the judgment.

It is argued by the appellees that the averments of the petition, concerning the arbitrary changes in the route at the points mentioned, are not allegations of fact, but mere conclusions of the pleader; and that the petition does not show that the changes made were not such minor changes which, in the exercise of the discretion, the Department of Public Works and Buildings had authority to make in locating Boute 2. The Act referred to is: “An Act in relation to the construction by the State of Hlinois of a State-wide system of durable hard-surfaced roads upon public highways of the State and the provision of means for the payment of the cost thereof by an issue of bonds for the State of Illinois” and was adopted by a vote of the People November 5, 1918. Section 1 [Cahill’s Ill. St. ch. 121, ff 183] of the Act, provides that a. Statewide system of durable hard-surfaced roads be constructed by the State of Illinois as soon as practicable, upon the public highways of the State; and along the routes described therein, as near as may be. Section 2 [Cahill’s Ill. St. ch. 121, [¶] 184] provides that the construction of this system of roads, and all work incidental thereto, shall be under the general supervision and control of the Department of Public Works and Buildings, subject to the approval of the Governor of the State; also, that the Department of Public Works and Buildings shall have power to make, and shall make final decisions affecting the work provided for in this section, and all rules and regulations it may deem necessary for the proper management and conduct of the work, and for carrying out all of the provisions of the Act in such manner as shall be to the best interest and advantage of the People of the State; and section 9 [Cahill’s Ill. St. ch. 121, 191] provides: “That the general location of the routes upon and along which said proposed roads are to be constructed shall be substantially as described in this section, so as to connect, with each other, the different communities and the principal cities of the State: Provided, however, that said Department of Public Works and Buildings shall have the right to make such minor changes in the location of said routes as may become necessary in order to carry out the provisions of this Act.” The location of route No. 2 is described in this section as: “Beginning in a public highway near Beloit, Wisconsin, and running along such highway in a general southerly direction to Cairo, affording Bockford, Oregon, Dixon, Mendota, Peru, La Salle, El Paso, Bloomington, Clinton, Decatur, Pana, Vandalia, Centraba, Duquoin, Carbon-dale, Anna, Cairo and the intervening communities reasonable connections with each other.” The petition alleges, concerning the propriety of the changes made, that the Village of Wapella is an incorporated village, under the general incorporation laws of the State, with a population approximately of 600 people, and is situated about five miles practically due north of the City of Clinton; that the cities of Bloomington, Clinton and Decatur are connected with a direct line of highways known as the Meridian Trail; and that the Meridian Trail is the main traveled highway for horse drawn and motor vehicles between the cities of Bloomington and Decatur, and particularly between the Village of Wapella and City of Clinton; and is a well improved, well kept and maintained highway, particularly that portion thereof from the Village of Wapella to the City of Clinton; that the Meridian Trail from Wapella to Clinton runs through a level prairie country its entire distance, with the exception of a small hill a short distance north of Clinton; and with no dangerous turns or dangerous curves therein; that this public highway, and particularly, that portion thereof, between the Village of Wapella and the City of Clinton, is the only main public thoroughfare for public travel for horse drawn and motor vehicles between the said Village of Wapella and City of Clinton, and is so constructed as to have as few grades and turns as is practical and consistent with the safety and welfare of the traveling public, and serves the traveling public between the City of Clinton and the Village of Wapella to the greatest advantage; and that the Meridian Trail passes through the east portion of the Village of Wapella; and from Wapella to Clinton, about a quarter of a mile east of the Illinois Central Railway, and the Illinois Traction system; and runs practically due north and south to a point about one and a half miles north of the City of Clinton, at which point the highway crosses said lines of railway and' comes to a point about 200 yards west of the right of way of the Illinois Traction system, from which point said trail or highway runs practically straight and directly into the City of Clinton, on a street known as Center Street, thus passing through the public square and the main built-up business and residence portion of the City of Clinton. The petition also avers that, notwithstanding the advantages of the highway in question to furnish this reasonable connection between the Village of Wapella and City of Clinton, the Department of Public Works and Buildings refused to locate said hard-surfaced road therein, but arbitrarily, and without any good and sufficient reason therefor, has had a road surveyed through the County of De Witt in the State of Illinois, different from that provided by the terms of the Act; and is now attempting to procure, and have procured, rights of way for the purpose of constructing said hard-surfaced route No.

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

Related

Hall v. People ex rel. Rogers
57 Ill. 307 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1870)
People ex rel. Hillard v. Davis
93 Ill. 133 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1879)
People ex rel. Brinkerhoff v. Swigert
107 Ill. 494 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1883)
Sterling Gas Co. v. Higby
25 N.E. 660 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1890)
People ex rel. Traders' Ins. of New York v. VanCleave
183 Ill. 330 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1899)
State Board of Equalization v. People ex rel. Goggin
191 Ill. 528 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1901)
Stott v. City of Chicago
68 N.E. 736 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1903)
People ex rel. Raster v. Healy
82 N.E. 599 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1907)
State v. Illinois Central Railroad
246 Ill. 188 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1910)
Culver v. Waters
93 N.E. 747 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1910)
People ex rel. Jones v. Webb
100 N.E. 224 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1912)
People ex rel. Bruce v. Dunne
101 N.E. 560 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1913)
Price v. Solberg
269 Ill. 459 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1915)
People's Gas Light & Coke Co. v. Stuckart
121 N.E. 629 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1918)
Mitchell v. Lowden
123 N.E. 566 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1919)
People ex rel. Gamber v. Board of Supervisors
128 N.E. 645 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1920)
Blattner v. Dietz
143 N.E. 92 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1924)
State ex rel. Lacaze v. Cavanac
30 La. Ann. 237 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1878)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
234 Ill. App. 111, 1924 Ill. App. LEXIS 255, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-greene-v-department-of-public-works-buildings-illappct-1924.