Meek v. Collinwood (Vil.)
Opinion of the Court
This is a suit brought by Fannie Meek against the village of Collin-wood and its treasurer to restrain the collection of an assessment made upon the property owned by the. plaintiff. It comes here on appeal from the judgment of the court of common pleas.
“Mayor’s Office, Collinwood, Ohio.
“June 10, 1903.
“To Fanny Meek:
“You are hereby notified that according to .the provisions of a resolution passed by the council on the eleventh day of May, 1903, you are required to construct a sidewalk in front of your premises on the southerly side of Kirby avenue between Adams street and Elm street, known as No.-on said street. Said sidewalk to conform to the following specifications: To be of sandstone sawed on both sides, to be five feet wide, two and one-half inches in thickness and laid six inches from the lot line, and to be constructed in accordance with the general ordinances of the village pertaining to sidewalks.
“If said sidewalk is not constructed within thirty days from receipt "of this notice, the council will have the same done at your expense, and the costs will be made a lien upon your property and collected with penalty and interest as provided by law. ’ ’ And then follows the indorsement by the clerk.
The notice, as already said, contained-a copy of the resolution that upon the failure of the property owners to construct the sidewalk the village would proceed to construct the sidewalk and assess the expense thereof upon the property owners; that is, the proper amount of such assessment upon each property owner.
The plaintiff did not construct the sidewalk. The village did construct a sidewalk at this point in front of the premises of the plaintiff, nearly a year after the. passage of the resolution. At the time this sidewalk was constructed, this plaintiff was absent from the village and knew nothing of its being done, until after the work was completed.
The plaintiff failed to pay the assessment which was certified as a lien upon her property to the county treasurer of Cuyahoga county, who, but being enjoined, will proceed to collect the amount of that assessment.
It is said, first, the village could not lawfully construct a sidewalk and have it assessed upon the property owner under the proceedings that were had in this case. And attention is called to Lan. 3600 (B. 1536-210), which is Sec. 50 of the municipal code, which provides that—
“The council of any municipal corporation may assess upon the abutting, adjacent and contiguous or other specially benefited lots or lands in the corporation, any part of the entire cost of, and expense connected with, the improvement of any .street, alley, dock, wharf, pier, public road or place by grading, draining, curbing, paving,” etc., and any part of the cost and labor by a percentage of the tax value of the property assessed, in proportion to the benefits which may result from the improvement, or by the foot frontage of the property.
And by Lan. 3602 (B. 1536-211) :
“Whenever it is deemed necessary by any city or village, to make any public improvement to be paid for in whole or in part by special assessments council shall declare by resolution (three-fourths of the whole number elected thereto concurring, except as otherwise provided herein) the necessity of such improvement. At the time of the passage of said resolution council shall have on file in the office of the board of public service in cities, and of the clerk in villages, plans, specifications, estimates and profiles of the proposed improvement, showing the proposed grade of the street and improvement after completion, with reference to the property abutting thereon, which plans, specifications, estimates and profiles shall be open to the inspection of all persons interested. ’ ’
And then it states that council shall also determine in said resolution the method of the assessment, the mode of-payment thereof, etc.
It will be observed that the proceedings here were not in conformity with these sections of the statute. But there is a «further provision in the statute with reference to sidewalks. Beginning with Lan. 3621 (B.
“The council of cities and villages may provide by ordinance for the construction and repair of all necessary sidewalks, or parts thereof, within the limits of the corporation, ’ ’ etc. °And then it provides:
“When the council of cities or villages declares by resolution that certain 'specified sidewalks shall be constructed, the clerk of council shall cause a written notice of the passage of such resolution to be served upon the owner or agent of the owner of each parcel of land1 abutting on such sidewalk, who may be a resident of such city or village, ’’ etc.
And in Lan. 3624 (B. 1536-235), it is provided that—
“If such sidewalks * * * are not constructed within fifteen days * * * from the service of the notice, * * * the department of public service in cities and council in villages may do or have the same done at the expense of the owner,” etc.
And I call attention especially to the last provision of Lan. 3624 (B. 1536-235), which is Sec. 73 of the code:
“No other or further proceedings * * # shall be necessary * * * by council proceedings, ” etc.
It is said that notwithstanding that provision it was still necessary before the council of the village or the board of public service in the city may assess upon the property owner the cost of constructing the-sidewalk, that there shall have been an ordinance passed, and that there shall have been the plans and specifications on file, as provided in Lan. 3600 (B. 1536-210).
The legislature has distinctly said that no other or further proceedings than those contained in the sections last read, which provide for exactly what was done in this ease, would be necessary.
And, so we hold that the proceedings of the council in providing for the construction of the sidewalk and the serving of the,notice and the like, was all that was necessary to authorize the construction of the sidewalk, if it constructed the sidewalk which it said it would construct, and to have-the cost of such construction assessed upon the property.
So that, there remains the question only whether having provided for a sidewalk of sandstone it should be constructed, and that upon failure of the owners to construct such sidewalk the village should proceed' to do the work and assess the cost upon the property owner. In short, did the village do what it said it would do 1 Did it say to this woman,, ‘ (Unless within fifteen days from the service of this notice you construct a sandstone sidewalk, six feet wide,” — giving the dimensions of the sidewalk, — “we will construct such sidewalk at your expense, and you will
We think this woman was not bound to pay for this sidewalk. The injunction prayed for in the petition is allowed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.