Walker v. Town of Waynesboro

Mississippi Supreme Court

Walker v. Town of Waynesboro

32 So. 2d 455, 202 Miss. 830, 1947 Miss. LEXIS 346

CourtMississippi Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 10, 1947

DocketNo. 36519.

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 32 So. 2d 455 (Walker v. Town of Waynesboro) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Walker v. Town of Waynesboro, 32 So. 2d 455, 202 Miss. 830, 1947 Miss. LEXIS 346 (Mich. 1947).

Pincite

Opinion

*836 Alexander, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

March 5, 1946, the Town of Waynesboro adopted an ordinance extending the municipal limits by the addition of a uniform border one-half mile wide around the four sides of its former area. Appeal therefrom by interested citizens brought the matter to the circuit court. Code 1942, Sections 3378, 3379. Appellants tendered an issue of reasonableness, enlarged by ten separate specifications. The town met such tender with a general issue plea.

The first assignment of error attacks the sufficiency of the town’s plea. Section 3379 provides: “The appeal from the ordinance shall be to the circuit court, and shall be tried on an issue to be made up there, and the question shall be whether the proposed . . . extension . . . of the municipality . . . be or be not unreasonable.” Failure of the town to set up affirmatively and in detail matters supporting their defense of reasonableness is the basis for the contention.

The statute does.not specify how the issue is “to be made up.” The burden of proof was upon the contestants. Town of Crystal Springs v. Moreton, 131 Miss. 77, 95 So. 242. They tendered the issue of reasonableness vel non. There was no occasion here to set up affirmatively that the ordinance was reasonable, otherwise than by joining issue. The procedure conforms to practice in the circuit court, and the trial court was not in error in denying con *837 testants’ motion to strike tke plea. The jury found for the town. ■

We have carefully examined the character and extent of the testimony and the instructions. Both are in substantial accord with the principles laid down in Forbes v. City of Meridian, 86 Miss. 243, 38 So. 676. We comment only on the predominant characteristic of the witnesses for contestants which discloses chiefly their personal reactions, and their opinions, as to the probability that no substantial benefits would accrue to them. The entire record-sufficiently reveals a purpose toward and a probability of benefit both to the citizens of the old and of the new areas, as interpreted by the Forbes case, to justify the verdict of the jury.

Affirmed.

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

*836 Alexander, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

March 5, 1946, the Town of Waynesboro adopted an ordinance extending the municipal limits by the addition of a uniform border one-half mile wide around the four sides of its former area. Appeal therefrom by interested citizens brought the matter to the circuit court. Code 1942, Sections 3378, 3379. Appellants tendered an issue of reasonableness, enlarged by ten separate specifications. The town met such tender with a general issue plea.

The first assignment of error attacks the sufficiency of the town’s plea. Section 3379 provides: “The appeal from the ordinance shall be to the circuit court, and shall be tried on an issue to be made up there, and the question shall be whether the proposed . . . extension . . . of the municipality . . . be or be not unreasonable.” Failure of the town to set up affirmatively and in detail matters supporting their defense of reasonableness is the basis for the contention.

The statute does.not specify how the issue is “to be made up.” The burden of proof was upon the contestants. Town of Crystal Springs v. Moreton, 131 Miss. 77, 95 So. 242. They tendered the issue of reasonableness vel non. There was no occasion here to set up affirmatively that the ordinance was reasonable, otherwise than by joining issue. The procedure conforms to practice in the circuit court, and the trial court was not in error in denying con *837 testants’ motion to strike tke plea. The jury found for the town. ■

We have carefully examined the character and extent of the testimony and the instructions. Both are in substantial accord with the principles laid down in Forbes v. City of Meridian, 86 Miss. 243, 38 So. 676. We comment only on the predominant characteristic of the witnesses for contestants which discloses chiefly their personal reactions, and their opinions, as to the probability that no substantial benefits would accrue to them. The entire record-sufficiently reveals a purpose toward and a probability of benefit both to the citizens of the old and of the new areas, as interpreted by the Forbes case, to justify the verdict of the jury.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 So. 2d 455, 202 Miss. 830, 1947 Miss. LEXIS 346, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walker-v-town-of-waynesboro-miss-1947.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack