Case ID: ill_62/html/0289-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Thomas H. Brown et al. v. The City of Chicago.
    
    1. Special assessments in Chicago—who may apply for judgment. The authority of the city collector of Chicago to apply for judgment for the sale of real estate, for the payment of unpaid special assessments, was abrogated by the constitution of 1870.
    2. Same—certificate of publication. The certificate of publication of the commissioners’ notice of their meeting to make a special assessment in the city of Chicago, and of the notice of application for confirmation of the assessment, is fatally defective if it omit to state the dates of the first and last papers containing such notices, or language equivalent thereto.
    Appeals from the Superior Court of Cook County.
    These cases arise upon the application of the city collector of Chicago for judgments upon a special assessment warrant. The court below granted orders for the sale of the real estate against which the assessment was made, for its payment. The objectors bring the record to this court.
    
      
       This case and the cases of the following named appellants against the city of Chicago are all considered in the same opinion : Adams & Parker, Peter Schuttler et al., and Francis S. How et al.
      
    
   Per Curiam:

These cases all arise upon one warrant, and out of the same proceedings. If we were to stop to discuss all the questions urged in these and the other assessment cases before us, the longest mortal life would not suffice to complete the task.

Two points are made, each of which is fatal to the judgment :

1st. That the collector was not authorized to apply for the judgment. Hills v. Chicago, 60 Ill. 86.

2d. That the certificate of publication of the notice of the meeting of commissioners to make the assessment, and of publication of notice of application for confirmation (Rue v. The City of Chicago, 57 Ill. 435, where the certificates were in the same form,) not showing the date of the last paper containing the same, as required by the statute.

Judgments reversed and the causes remanded.

Judgments reversed.