![]() This action was instituted in the superior court December 26, 1918.Īppellant filed ten pleas to the declaration. The five years during which, as stated in the Lockwood Case, one sustaining damages from the closing of an alley can maintain an action against a city for such damages, expired in this case in February. There was no provision in the ordinance in any way referring to the refunding of the money at the expiration of five years. The evidence in the record shows that following the passage of the ordinance its terms had been complied with by the payment of $659.96 by the appellee to the city to indemnify it against any damages that might accrue on account of the vacation of said alley. 81, and reference may be had to that case for the terms of the ordinance here. The ordinance was substantially the same in its wording and conditions as that set out at some length in Lockwood & Strickland Co. The record shows that on February 10, 1908, the city council of the appellant passed an ordinance vacating a certain alley between Fifty-First and Fifty-Third streets, running from Prairie avenue about halfway to Indiana avenue. JONATHAN SPLITT ARCHITECTS LTD TRIALThe trial judge thereafter certified that the validity of a municipal ordinance was involved and that in his opinion the public interest required that the cause should be taken directly to this court, and the case is here on appeal. After the pleadings were settled and trial was had, the superior court directed a verdict in favor of appellee. Cochrane, of Chicago, for appellee.Īppellee brought this action in assumpsit in the superior court of Cook county against the city of Chicago to recover $659.96 paid by him to said city, to be held by it as an indemnity on account of the vacation of a certain alley in said city under a provision of an ordinance hereafter referred to. Ogden, all of Chicago, of counsel), for appellant.ĭ. Reversed, and cause remanded for further proceedings.Īppeal from Superior Court, Cook County Joseph B. Verdict directed for plaintiff, and defendant appealed on certificate of public interest. Action by James Mowatt against the City of Chicago. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |