Case ID: ohio-st_52/html/0600-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "By the Court.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Cincinnati v. Anderson.
    
      Assessment for street improvement — Omnibus resolutions — Act op January 11, 189S (90 Ohio Laws, 5).
    
    (Decided April 23, 1895.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Hamilton county.
    
      Theodore Horstman, Corporation Counsel, for plaintiff in error.
    
      William M. Ampt, for defendant in error.
    Suit brought to enjoin an assessment made to meet the costs and expenses of the condemnation of land for a street improvement, on the ground that the condemning ordinance was irregularly adopted, and that the property assessed did not abut on the improvement, the mode of assessment adopted being by the front foot. The case was appealed to the circuit court, and judgment rendered for the plaintiff, upon a hearing of the cause.
   By the Court.

We agree with the opinion of the circuit court, as announced in another case, that the fact that resolutions declaring it necessary to improve several streets are voted on together in council, without any separation or division of the question as to each, does not impair the validity of the assessments levied thereunder. They come within the reason and spirit of the curative law of January 11, 1893 (90 Ohio Laws, 5). This is in accordance with recent holdings of this court in similar cases. But as the property of the defendant.in error, Anderson, is found by the court not to abut upon the improvement, the judgment of the circuit court is, upon the authority of Cincinnati v. Batsche, ante 324, affirmed.