Supreme Court Decision

The written opinión of the supreme court, which was unanimous, in the case of Bryant Walker, administralor of the estáte of C. L. Ford, deceased, vs. the City of Ann Arbor, is at hand, and the following are the most important points in the decisión: We regard the rule laid down in the cases cited as salutory and just, and if the faets in thls case admitted of the application of that rule we should apply it with great satisfaction to ourselves. For, although, as will be shown later, we feel constrained to hold that the basis adopted for assessment was erroneous and therefore juris1dictionally defective, yet we are left in doubt as to whether the complainant's cestius que trusts have really suifered any substantial injury by reason of this departure. We find, however, in this' case an admission of record that the complainant had no knowledge oL these proceeding-s until after they were taken, and feel that we can nöt, in view of this admission, ignore jurisdiccional defecte without doing violence to established principies. We need discuss but one defect in the prooeedings. Local Act 313 of L,aws of 1895 provides "That all lateral and connecting sc-wers may be constructed at the eost and expense of the lands, tenements and premises adjacent thereto and benefited thereby, and the cost thereof may be levied on and assessed against such lands, tenements and premises, and collected from the owners thereof by foot frontag, according to benefits, or by land values a.s the common council shall or may determine by ordinance." The record shows that theassessment was made on the ba?is of the value of each parcel "exclusive of improven erected thereon." While it was doubtless competent for the legislature to have authorized an assessmünt .on a basis which would exclude the value of improvement (Cooley on Taxation, 456) the statu te in question does not do so duc authorizes an assessment based upon the value of the land. Land, of course, ineludes the structures and improvements thereon. Blackstone, 2nd Book, p. 12. It follows that the basis adopted was unauthorized and the assessment was jurisdictionally defective. The assessment must be set aside, but without prejudice to a reassessment if the city shall be advised that one may be lawfully made. Complainant will recover costs against the city. , The other Justices concurred. City Attorney Butterfield says he will now proceed to get an act passed by the coming legislature authorizing the city to make an assessment on land values exclusive of improvement; to make all acts thus far made under the charter and ordinance1 in regard to the sewer assessment invalid; and that all delinquent payments be deferred for four years f rom the time of the passage of the act the same as if the work had never been started. '