Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1914-05-09
DECISION OF SUPREME COURT
From Morton County.

From Morton County.
Alexander Mckenzie, Ruth Rodman
and Amy Rodman, Plaintiffs and Ap.
pellants. VS.. City of Mandan, County
Of Morton o. H. Killand, County
Treasurer and H. H. Harmon, c0un-
ty auditor Defendants and Respond.
ents.
ID A description in an ordinance
creating a sewer district which reads
"all lots and parts of lots, all blocks
and parts OF blocks, and all other
parcels of land within the City of
Mandan, Morton County North Da.
kota, as the same is now plated and
recorded in the Office, of register of
deeds in and for said Morton COun-
ty which lies north of the right Of
way of the Northern Pacific Railway
Company, including Mandan proper,
Fiqst Northern Pacific Addition to
Mandan, Heart View Addition to
Mandan, that portion of Mead's AID.
dition to Mandan laying north of
said right of way, and all of Helms
worth & McLean's Addition to Man
J dan and all of said right of way be-
longing to the said Northern Paci-
fc Railway Company" is held to in
clude that portion of Helmsworth &
McLean's Addition which lies south
of the railway track as we'll as that
portion which lies north thereof.
(2) Section 2SO1, r. C. 1905, re-
quires special assessments to be
made on the basis of benefits and of
benefits alone. 1t specifically frequires
an inspection Of the ';lots or parcels
Of land by the commission and a
complete list Of both the benefits and
tho assessments to be made.
Seeking to Levy.
3) If in seeking to levy an as.
scssment under Section 2S01, II. &.
1908, the commission neglects to in
spcct the land and to make or cause
to be made a complete list of both
the benefits and the assessments or
IN computing such assessments
adopts a method which is unwarrant-
cd By the statute, the assessment is
void and property owners will not
be prccluded from bringing an action
in u court Of equity to enjOin the col
lection of the same by the mere fact
that they did not appear before tho
board OF commissioners or the city
council to object to such assessment.
4) Objections to an assessment
which seek to correct errors in judy
mcnt and mistakes as to the real
amount the property is benefited,
must be urged before the commits
sioners and the city council, and ii
not so urged cannot afterwards be
relied upon in a subsequent suit in
equity to refrain the collection OF
such assessment. This Nis not true,
however, of objections which involve
the legality of the proceedings and
raise the question that the method
pursued was contrary to that provid.
cd by the statute.
Specia! Assessment.
~ A complaint which alleges that
such special assessment commission
in attempting to determine the &C
tual benefits to accru to the lots
and. parcels of land in said pretended
assessment district by the construc-
ton OF aid sewer acted arbitrarily
and unlawfully and by an %inflexible
rule, and totally failed and neglected
to exercise any discretion; that it
did not determine said benefits, if one
there were at the time nor in the
manner prescribed by law, but first
determining arbitrarily how much
the cost of said sewer and of said
trunk line should be borne by each
Of the lots in said district and hav.
ing so determined the amount to as
sess against each lot and parcel OF
land arbitrarily and illegally as aforo
said, and basing the estimate of
benefits upon the cost of the sewer
and the proportion thereof assessed
to each lot and parcel Of land deter
many of the lots and parcels of land
in said district was benefited fifty
per cent more than the proportion of
cost so assessed; and this though
many of the lote and parcels of land
in said sewer district were not bene.
tted at all by said sewer, and some
were benefited more than others, and
some were so situated that said
sewer could not serve them shows
and alleges a rc,hod Of procedure
on the part of the commissioners