McBride v. City of Chicago
Illinois Supreme Court
Silas McBride shows, by his bill, that he is the owner, in fee, of certain real estate, situate in said city, and described as follows, viz.: Lot four, block thirty-five, school section addition to Chicago. That he was such owner on the first day of July, A. D. 1855, and from thence hitherto.
Read the full summary
Silas McBride shows, by his bill, that he is the owner, in fee, of certain real estate, situate in said city, and described as follows, viz.: Lot four, block thirty-five, school section addition to Chicago. That he was such owner on the first day of July, A. D. 1855, and from thence hitherto. That said lots of land front and butt on a certain street or highway, in said city, usually called and known as Taylor street; that certain proceedings have been taken by said city for the purpose of widening said street, from the Chicago river, to a point thereon, west of the lands of your orator, and…
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
Numerous objections are urged, to reverse the decree of the court below dissolving the injunction and dismissing appellant’s bill. These objections are to the mode of exercising a power, with which the appellees were clearly invested, by their charter. It authorizes the Common Council to open, widen and extend streets within the city limits, and to appoint commissioners to ascertain and assess the damage and recompense due the owners of lands affected by such improvement; and, at the same time, to determine what persons will be benefited by such improvement, and to assess the damages and…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Ames v. SchlaegerIllinois Supreme Court · 1944
- City of Peoria v. KidderIllinois Supreme Court · 1861
- County of Cook v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1864
- Deming v. JamesIllinois Supreme Court · 1874
- Daniel v. City of New Orleans, Page & Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1874