Case ID: ill_257/html/0084-01.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

The People ex rel. A. H. Gleghorn, County Collector, Appellee, vs. The Elgin, Joliet and Eastern Railway Company, Appellant.
    
      Opinion filed December 17, 1912.
    
    This case is controlled by the decision in People v. Chicago and Alton Railroad Co. (post, p. 208.)
    Appeal from the County Court of Grundy county; the Hon. George Bedford, Judge, presiding.
    ■This was an application for judgment and order of sale in the county court of Grundy county against the property of the appellant for the following taxes levied for the* year 1911: Additional road and bridge tax for the town of Eelix, $123.12; additional road and bridge tax for the town of Braceville, $319.19; school tax for building purposes, school district No. 80, $279.14; and school tax for building purposes, school district No. 74, $311.85. The appellant appeared and filed objections to judgment and order of sale on the ground that in making the additional tax levies in the towns of Felix and Braceville section 14 of the Road and Bridge act as amended had not been complied with, and that the tax levies in school districts Nos. 80 and 74 were mere subterfuges, resorted to by the taxing bodies of said districts to exceed the limits fixed by the statute for which taxes might be levied for building purposes. The objections were overruled and judgment was entered, and this appeal followed.
    A. J. Smith, H. B. Smith, and E. M. Smith, for appellant.
    C. F. Hanson, State’s Attorney, for appellee.
   Per Curiam :

All the questions raised in the trial court and brought here for review have been passed upon by this court adversely to the contention of appellant in the opinion filed at this term of court in the case of People v. Chicago and Alton Railroad Co. (post, p. 208.) That case controls this case, and we will not repeat here the reasoning found in that opinion.

The judgment of the county court will be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.