TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Peck v. City of Chicago

Phillip F. W. Peck v. The City of Chicago, Appellee Joseph N. Barker v. The City of Chicago, Appellee The City of Chicago, in Error v. Charles R. Starkweather, in Error

Peck v. City of Chicago, 22 Ill. 578 (1859)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Illinois Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
April 15, 1859
Judges
Caton
Citations
22 Ill. 578
Headnotes
FROM COOK COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. Assessments for improvements already made, by parties other'than the city, are illegal.
Summary
The bill of exceptions sets forth in substance, that defendants filed the following among other objections, to the rendition of a judgment: The order of the Common Council, directing that the sum of $18,200 be assessed on real estate of the city of Chicago, deemed benefited by the filling, curbing and paving of Washington street, from the west line of LaSalle street to the east line of Market street, “ in accordance with the superintendent’s specifications for the same,” was made by the Common Council without having adopted or agreed upon any plan, or mode, or specification for said improvements, but the same was an arbitrary order for assessing that sum for the purpose of .raising money to pay one John McBean for paving said street, under private contract with some of the property holders on said street, and this warrant is being now prosecuted for that purpose. That a large part of the said work was done by said McBean, under said private agreement with said property holders, before said order was made.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Caton

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Caton, C. J. The assessments in these cases, were in part for improvements already executed by parties other than the city, and without any liability on the part of the city. The assessments were therefore illegal, and it was the duty of the court to refuse to render judgments for them. Pease v. City of Chicago, 21 Ill. R. 500.

The judgments in the two first cases are reversed, and in the last the judgment is affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1877–1878: 118772026peak 1877 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Ricketts v. Village of Hyde Park85 Ill. 110 (1877)

Most recent

  1. Ricketts v. Village of Hyde Park85 Ill. 110 (1877)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list