Case Name: The City of Chicago v. Julius Corcoran
Court: Illinois Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1902-04-16
Citations: 196 Ill. 146
Docket Number: 
Parties: The City of Chicago v. Julius Corcoran.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Reports
Volume: 196
Pages: 146–147

Head Matter:
The City of Chicago v. Julius Corcoran.
Opinion filed April 16, 1902.
Special assessments—what does not amount to arbitrary subdivision of land. A provision in a sewer ordinance for “house connection slants of six inches internal diameter,” to be placed on both sides of the sewer opposite each twenty-five feet of lot frontage, does not amount to an arbitrary subdivision of land assessed as an entire tract by its legal description. (Vandersyde v. People, 195 Ill. 200, followed.)
Appeal from the County Court of Cook county.; the Hon. William T. Hodson, Judge, presiding.
Edgar Bronson Tolman, and Robert Redfield, for appellant.
Mason & Noyes, for appellee.

Opinion:
Per Curiam:
This is a petition filed in the county court of Cook county by the city of Chicago for the confirmation of a special assessment levied to defray the cost of constructing a sewer, with man-holes and catch-basins, in Fargo avenue, from Forest street to a point 415 feet east of the easterly line of Sheridan road, in the city of Chicago. The ordinance provided: "House connection slants of six (6) inches internal diameter shall be placed on both sides of said sewer opposite each twenty-five (25) feet of lot frontage." The appellee appeared and filed numerous objections. The only one relied upon, however, was that his land had been arbitrarily subdivided into 25-foot lots, which was sustained by the county court.
The property of appellee is an unsubdivided lot with a frontage upon Fargo avenue of 305 feet and a depth of 161 feet, and the assessment was made upon the entire tract as a whole, according to its legal description. Under the authority of Vandersyde v. People, 195 Ill. 200, this was not a subdivision of appellee's property, and the assessment should have been confirmed.
The judgment of the county court is reversed and the cause remanded.
" 7 , "7 "7 Reversed and remanded.