HomeMy WebLinkAboutPeterson, George W
,
..
,
,
!
i
['
,
.-
{i:4 4-f' 4 ~ ("')":::79 ~~~
~L ~ -41:>ff'f'P ~~
~ ~~~,~~.~
ywv?? P7 --v (~ ()&/I--?'P.~ ~
(iJ7 {?~f'70 -r-cJ ~~
. . 'v0Hf '.' .vfJ!lI.-------
. ~ Y'(3I~Y1-f,,""'jJ; "-9 ;z,~.
(- .~.~~~~-.... ..." ':p;iJ,~:
I ~'ys-tl {!/ ~V11J -vp ~ ~.~ ?1
r. ~>..,~ ~ r f7 p~-'.'
. ~f~'~ ~a~I/~..-..
, ~.~. P~'c~ 1(~
, ~ fl-9?:. ..~- - ~~'~. -
. .. - , ..-- .....1>......-- . ~". ':g;~Vv' . .
~~--~. rry ~.ft'~~,~~, .~..,,"
~ -=r ~-Ap>- -"?"?d-0'L!: -
'0J:p vtZlI ~~ .. ...... /'
I -:p 1;, ~-~-~%- ~~F ....
~ 'tJ 'I/'ff -r~---'
a--PJ9--P/", . _~ ~~L'
. 'fJ' -", \ ~~1?~,
-:...-..:;;.....~ ~ .-.::.jWIO';~~~~:;;"';~~;~~~A<i;f,wj....-,ii~'.i-i"':;;';" i
~ ~ "P~ ~/mp~ .
~t.. .......
~;:r~~~~h-o/~1v:,A ~ ..
~-'~-~'-~'.'~'~.~ m~,____
~? ~~ -0p-r ~-1L(T ~--~~ ',__u_____
~,,7 ~,P -rf- ~~~. ~,l~I~~- "
---- -'--"--'i7~'~ u fQ 'i '6M(;,~~-r
",.'~
I
,
,.:
. !
. !~l f/.~/' ,
~
1
i
,
-" ,- ....; .
~~"" ~~..j. ___~ ':f '. _____.. ....,', ',' . .
. ,'" ..t? ..,~, ..:1 " '~":rI-jJ. -2:
, I
I ,,' i
I ' ..~:-~--------'~
I .. u<."," -:'~ ~ilYl ~,~.~
l'. ! '., .' "l44rJ;-~ .,A~ l~ _~ /~k_~
: '.~'..-=- '~~"~B'ZI-~" .
I ' ' .,_,h",n~' "", J ~~ ~ ~ ~ 4V- ~
" ~~,~d~, . ~r~vf '
~ fvUJ1 ~
"."~~' Br/- '. /j-tf,~
~l of2/-' ~ .( :3
I . . "c-'........ ~
h.,';"'lJ.c:",':, ", ..,' {};r;.~""",,~~1:0r~ci{r,.nc ~,<.,.=...... ,~-
...".n~ ~ d;- c1tva ,~~
-,~.~~.' .~.
~~. . ..~.':7.~
,.t......"'i'C_U;"'+~...~.. ~'~n'~
kk"11.~ MA.-ir.-i-l ~ ~ ~
'._~;~tb: ".,,' . '/"~tcft.~~~ '
. . ,~~ e-vr~ n ,.n",/~( tYlJ
,
I
I
i
I
I
i
I
I.
"
t, "
~:.'<--_.- ".
t
I
.
,
I
. _.,_'_'~._ u_____________n~__-..,.----"---
r;{,vyf-- tf- ~ 0 -
,
1
, .
~
~7---'(~-.fJ/~---
~~d7.-~~.-..
I ~ /LA/rYfMj\. ~_ ___ _ _ _ .....
iP../h..et-df MrWl'_/YM-~~___~I'_~
..~~....~~..
_~vdW'.. Q-d-..~. _ fjlh~
-'---"'-'-", '--'----~-'_._--,,---- - -~._'"'---,,~--~-,",---_.._-_.
lvr 0- .~4~......aL
1:#:t n 1--F~-.
-- 'Yvfr!~' ~ Q__ ...-...-..-~--~ 6-;i:!:
-.~~ -. ..... .... -.----- ..---..-- ...-----"CC----.-..---
,of
I. .
--'.
..
_____,_,___~___..u___ ..__r__,.___..'._.......,..______ '0---'-
J
I
i
,
J
.- ...-,."'-,,'-, ='-'
"';"1'" . . j.....' ..
. ,., ~ .... ,,'. _r....;, , '
r"-~--."~r: : :~1 F~ ;.
~- ...~-(.......__.- .~~. .
~L__. ~ ~~.
, ~
..~....-
"ie> _ .... . ~_~._... '_.~. u__~~~__...'~ . ..~~:-~--:-~- ..~_ j
~ .. . ,.., ..... .... . .. -, \"""&". ,..",<\. ..... 'j
~."..-"'--"~;-7t;;;; .~'~.ibt.i,~~.~r::.~....'.,;~;~.;,..NJ:;~ft~4:J.. ..~~,...._. (~
(,.~.,'- ""'i"'f"'~~' "". ," ";\ """"~>'~'
., ~'. ~ .' . .....- ......- ----....--{1.. .------- ".- -..
~ . .- .... ... . -. '. . . 'i: '.'
... ~. ~ ...~. ~'?-7.(J?--- , j
.._ - ___.._.. _. . __ _________ .,.-._____,__'____n___.____________.___._________
/ZtJ:v:a:~
~/-h~ f?1 ~ .
G/Lsr.f): ~
,"""""..
..;:.8'\\1l':;:-:;:\".~'\4~~.~~ '''7S..,1t''~~~~'~'-'--1
. "----.:--~----m~--m--:;~_-'.::;~..7;~~~;--~ - '1
_.._n_____"_,___..~::.-..;:,-.~----.'---c.--..---------:--
, . .\4;", .
. . -1
I
I
1
i
I
._---_.--'-----~',,'-,- -..-,.-.---
.------- "'-~
tJ.f '.'
"4~'
.>, ..., ." '::J' .
-:;',:' ",'. .
. , : - (' ~ .., . .:
I
(
o
u
y
~
!,Appellate Division, Supreme Court, 3rd. JJepart:11ent.
'ParJ<er P..J. ,Landon,Herrick,;'.lerwin,PutniUlTl Assc.Jsts.
Saratoga, September, IIT99i
-----------------------~-------------
People ex reI George W. Peterson, a :
Taxpayer of the Town of Austerlitz)
!Columbia County, N. Y.,
.
.
Appellant, :
aGainst
2D-42
J. Thornton Clark, Supervisor, et at:
Respond ent s. :
_ _ ".' .. _ _. _ .. _ _ .. .. .. _ - - .. - .. .. .. .. .. - - - .. .. - - - .. .. .. t
S. W. Smith for Appellant.
A. B. Gardenier for Respondents.
------~-,.---------------------------------------~---
, Per Curiam.
In pursuance of a reso lution of the Board
of Supervisors of the County of' Columbia, passed
at it s annual session in the faU of 1898', the
sum of' $415, was levied and assessed upon the
taxahle property of the town of Austerlitz, in said
county, for hiGhway purposes, which sum was collect-
ed in ,January, IflUB', and was paid over to C. Robert
Grant, sole Commissioner of Highways of said town.
'l'he appropriation was appHed to the payment of
highway indebt eclnes s incur r,ed 1Il the year preceding
that for which said SUllll of $415 was raised for'
higlnvay pllrpos eSt
It appears from the return that the fiscal
year of the town en'.l'edi 1,lard) 14th, H39D. 'rhe Com-
"---"..,.-._._,-~_.-.....--",..", .', ~,--..,.~..,.
".".._,_,,,.___..~,.,,.".,. ,.__...~ ..,...,>, ,_<'HW__,.~-..,t' ...
-"-"''1'
2 missioner of Highways present ed to the 'rown Board a
report dated Maroh 8th, 1899, which he states to be
a "report for the year ending Marct'l, Im)9," in
which he says, "I have paid out during the said year
"for whi.ch I have receipts, the foll.owing sums; I
then folJ.ows a statement of items aggregating,
$414.90.
The amount of such claim was allowed, with
the exceptiolIli of $G, which left a halance in the
ha,nds of stlc'h COfanissioner, due the town of $6.10.
'['he learned cO\lnsel for the defendants,
amonG other qucsti.olls, submits for our consideration
the fOllowinG:
"\Vhethe r a Corll;, issioner of Highways can law-
"full.y apply moneys raised for repairs and improve-
"ments to 1lighways and bridges, for one year, to
"the payment of debts incurred for like purposes
"in a previous year?"
We are of the opinion that it was beyond the
power of the Comr;tissioner of HiGhways tu create a
I
debt against tIle town of Austerlitz for repairs on
the highways beyond the appropriation of that year,
,except in the way provided by statut e.
Section 19 of the Highway Law (Chapter 568,
Laws of I890), provides that COJ1ll11i.ssioners of
Hi~lways shall also ~ake at the second meeting of
the Town Board in each year, "a statement of tJl1e
.improvements necessary to he made on such highways
"and bridrl:es, and an estimate of the probable ex-
.pense thereof, beyond what the labor to be assessed
"
,
3 "in that year will accomplish; a duplicate of which
.shall be delivered by th~ COillnissioners to the
'Supervisor of the town. who shall. present such
"duplicate statement to tJle Boarel of Supervisors,
"'who shall cause the amollnt so~stimated, not exceed-
Ping five hundred dollars in anyone year, to be
I,'assessed, levied and collected, in such town, in
· the same manner as othe I' town charges.' This is
intended to provid e for the hig'hway expenses of the
ensuing;: year.
If in the preceding year the appropriation
made was insufficient to keep in repair the high-
ways and bridges, the proper procedure for the HiGh-
way Commissioner, and the only way by whie], he could
create an bbligation <Lc;atnst the town, was, to apply
uncleI' the provisions of Section 10 of the lIighwa.y
Law, to the Town Board, for its consent to make the
improvements required, and Section II of the Act
provicl es a method by whic]] he cOlIld obtain payment
the refor.
It is not claimed that the Commissioner
obtainel!ll the consent of the 'I'own Board to make tJlJe
.improvements in the jlrececlin~ year for whic]) he had
jnsUfficient funds to pay.
II
We are unable to find In the Highway Law, or
other statutes of the State. any provision author-
izing a Highway Commissioner to create a debt
against a town, except in the manner provided in
the tenth section of the Highway Law.
Unless the
amount expen de d by the COllun is si one I' tli e pI' evio\1s
year was a legal claim against the town, he had no
<- ~
4 authority to retain the money of the town raised to
keep in repair the highways and bridges therein,
for the ensuing year, nor had the Town Board author-
ity to allow hi s cIa im.
We think it is clear that under the proVIsions
of the Hif;hway Law, the money raised in January,
18DD, for improvements ~~"_~e made on tile highways
of the town, could not lef;ally be expended or used
to pay expenses made by the COillllissioner on account
of the highways and bridges beyond the appropriation
of the pr lOr year. Such expenditlJre was unauthor-
i;;ed, and created no leGal claim against the town.
People ex reI Everett, et aI, vs, Board of
Supervisors, 93 N.Y" 3D7;
People ex re] Van Keuren vs, Town Auditors, 74
N. y" ;SIO;
People ex re] Bevins vs, Supervisors,\82
HUIiL, 29[3.
We should prefer to reach another conclusion,
for the reason that the town of Austerlitz appears
to have had the benefit of the team work and
expend it u res on the highway made by the Highway
ConunisSiol'cr, and it is not S\lGGested that his clatn,
I'
is' authorized by statute, was not a just and reas-
onable one. But und er the provis ions of the High-
way Law refGrred to, and the authorities a.bove
cited, we feel compelled to hold the action of the
'I'own Board in alLowing the demand in question,
. llnaut hor ized.
~
~
5 'rhe determination of the Town Board allow-
ing the claim of the Highway Commissioner at
$408.90, should be reversed, with costs of this
appeal to the relator~
All concur, except Putnam J. not voting~
- j'- -~..-u "-1.1 .q:z-
Ih--LQ:lL... 'lM)L7 ::-t-
t)APP. Div., Sup. Court,
3rd. Dep't.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - '. - -
Peo.ex reI George iV.
Peterson,
-'--_._~'
vs.
c.F--
J. Thornton Clark,
Supvr., et al.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - '. - -
()Saratoga,Sept. ,1899.
No. 29-42.
Opinion, Per Curiam.
~.<. ~ ->< LI !t1u.
~#~;.~
;;:; - ~
~v"L: \---,.,.......,
O ...-(./- V" J
~---------'