St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-07-04
THREE BY COLLINS
TWO DECISIONS IN WHICH THE
FINDINGS ARE RE-
VERSED.
DULUTH ASSESSMENT CASE.
SHE RIGHT TO TAX FOR LOCAL
IMPROVEMENTS WAS DIS
PUTED,
DULUTH ASSESSMENT CASE.
GUT THE CITY WON IT'S POINT.
Lower Court Ruling Affirms In a
Personal Injury Damage Case
Against the Omaha.


Justice Collins, of the supreme court,
handed down three decisions yester-
day, In two of which the judgment
and order of the lower court are re-
versed. The titles and syllabi of the
cases follow:
In the matter of the appeal of Mar
tina H. Norton, State eX rel City of
Duluth, relator, VS.. The Judges of the
District Court, st. Louis County, re-
spondents and in the matter of the ap-
peal of The Northwestern Loan and
Investment Company, state ex rel City
of Duluth, relator, VS.. the Judges of
the District Court, st. Louis County,
respondents. That part of General
Laws 1891, CHI. 49, sub. CHI. 8, which
provides for the levying of assess
ments for local improvements is not
in conflict with the state constitution
on the ground that it authorizes the
assessments to be made upon the
property fronting upon the improve
ment. Statutes which on a proper
basis divide municipal corporations
into classes according to population
and legislation adapted to the differ
ent classes are general in their nature,
and are not a breach of constitution
al prohibition against the enactment
of special laws, and the mere fact that
at the time of the passage of such a
statute there is but one, or a limited
number of municipalities, having the
population specified in the act does not
of itself render it unconstitutional.
After the work required to be done
in making certain local improvements
in the village of West Duluth had
been placed under contract the village
council proceeded to make and levy
the partial assessment provided for by
sub. CHI. supra sec. j, prescribing the
territory benefited and the basis for
the assessment On the completion of
the work the council levied the final
assessment authorized by the same
section, covering the same territory
and on the same basis, but proportions
ally. Held, that property holders who
had acquiesced in and sanctioned the
first assessment by failing to object to
its business and validity, could not
be allowed to oppose and contest the
final assessment on grounds which
would have been available when the
first assessment was made. Held that
the constitutional rule requiring uni
formity of taxation is not violated by
that part of sec. which authorizes
and requires a partial assessment
based on the estimated cost.
Judgements reversed
COLLINS. J.
Joseph Bamka, respondent, vs. Chi
cago, st. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha
Railroad Company, appellant. The
general rule that the Judgment of a
court having jurisdiction of the sub
Ject matter, of the parties and the
process and rendered directly upon the
point in question IS conclusive between
the same parties is not applicable when
the same person though a party to
both suits is such in different capaci-
ties, in the one occupying dfstinc-
lively representative position, such as
an administrator, or as a general, or
an ad Item guardian, and in the other
as an individual.
Held, in action brought by a father
In his individual right to recover for
loss OF service, for expenses incurred
and for compensation for care and
trouble sustained by him growing out
OF injuries to his minor son, ALLEGED
to have been the result of defendants
carelessness and negligence, that a
judgment rendered In favor of the
defendant in prior action brought
under the provisions of q. S. 1894 Sec.
OLGA, by the father, is not a bar to re-
covery. Order affirmed.
COLLINS, ].
P. r. VAIL as administrator, ETC.,
respondent, VS.. John Anderson ct al,
partners as Anderson e Korb, appel
liant. The bona fide payment of a debt
due to a person dying intestate made
to the sole heir at law Of the deceased
and the sole Distribute of the funds
OF his estate, before administration is
granted, will, if equity requires, oper-
ate as a discharge of the debtor from
liability to a subsequently appointed
administrator. Applying the rule above
stated to the second defense set forth
In the answer herein, it is held that
facts sufficient to constitute a defense
to plaintiffs cause of action are al
legged in. said defense.
Among other things stated in the
answer it was alleged that the estate
In question was and is solvent and
suihclent to pay all claims and de-
mandS against it, together with the
expenses of administration without col
lectlng or including the funds in con-
troversy. Held, to guard against a con-
tingency that such. estate may become.
pending administration, unable to meet
and discharge all claims, liabilities and
expenses, that the proper practice for
the court below is to stay all proceed
1ngs herein until the ability to paw is
accurately determined in the probate
court
Order reversed COLLINS T