The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1871-04-30
BROOKLYN COURTS.
SUPREME cuusT-sPEclAL TERM.
The Contested Assessment Leascs-Decision I'm
Favor of the City.
In

The Contested Assessments Leascs-Decision In
Favor Of the City.
Before Judge Gilbert.
Hoyac; Waters ana Others u.s. The Citg or Brook-
I'm ana Seren other Cases.The property owners
fierrepont street, Fulton and other streets
petitioned the court for an injunction to prevent the
collection OF the assessments for repaving those
thoroughIares with patent pavements. The case
was argued the week before last, and yesterday
Judge Gilbert rendered decision In favor or the
city. the following opinion OF the Court will be
read with Interest by the taxpayers OF BROOKLYN
These motions must be denied II the plaintiffs have sui
have mistaken their remedy 1t impossible these
sa % s 81 & s ays been H T%y
urge, has often been urged unsuccessfuy before
First the preventing Of multiplicity Of suits and second,
the saaa iron s .aer s Win TO the
crest between the persons assessed Each his lot
TO the suit It i onEE when the action Is broash. !.
commission Of an &C. injurious to property or rights in which
interest that be brought BY one or more
in behalf themselves and others these elements
the question whether Mr. Ropes property shall be seized aud
opr to the Of the upon or
tanning Of suit invite litigation BY ali the
Obtained only By separate suit. in favor each them
objections validity Of the assess
menis are yet iorh IN the Some of them
Water others upon the illegal
particular uA-
not spSear IN the but which
necessary notice latter class o. oDlscons IN
L. TIE iHuSs lot Be
@ p ss no hn s %
sna o @ as 90 On G
Court % 1a' " sooyn T ssGd
MAT case, as in the case before me, the com,
that "a ci
corporation authority take for assess
The DELIVERING he as h s
sa Sy % ss IN which, q
have uniformly refused TO The superior Court q
am lie X tn a G S
era proceedings, all Of which indispensable va
e.,stea" FOR tins the that title
the plantins title and afforded no ground tor the in.
y u a S e. Court d Xypss a. s
the same principle This the language Of the Court n
complaint should have alleged distinctly and plainly that the
mon COUNCIL and upon their face valid and created valid
lien, but we're wholly void by reason Of extrinsc matters
nereore the Complaint are 70 Be- a:
payment OF them would liable trespasser
NO 81 r..
a. In The lie " Ia. Tine not Sss
competed but think this makes difference IN the
to be applied Assuming bur not admitting, therefore, that
assessment before sale may oe such cloud tie
to Justify equitable nteposton these views decisive
the and would supeuous discuss other
questions which Deliberately the
81 Justice have little to do with questions Of public policy but
tnry haa w.uia, 10 my Judgment PC extremely preJu
dicai the public welfare extend the
OF equity the proceedings municipal bodies
the validity OF tar or assessment against him II such
ceedngs are unannorxe they are naity and afford no
merely irregular they be reviewed when
nation OF them sought by the writ Of certiorar In
these ways individual rights be adequately protected
without to tue public interests Pursuing
farther, the continue the injunction denied,
and the temporary injunction dissolved case with
ten dollars coats.