Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
North Laramie Land Co. v. Hoffman
268 U.S. 276
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1925-05-11
- Topic
- general
How later courts describe this case
- upholding statutory notice of time to file objections to, and a claim for damages from, a legislative decision by a board of county commissioners to construct a new road in part because "[s]uch statutes are universally in force and are general in their application "
- "All persons are charged with knowledge of the provisions of statutes and must take note of the procedure adopted by them...."
- Due process does not require “individualized notice of state-law remedies which... are established by published, generally available state statutes and case law.”
- “Al persons are charged with knowledge of the provisions of statutes and must take note of the procedure adopted by them.... ”
- “All persons are charged with knowledge of the provisions of statutes and must take note of the procedure adopted by them and when that procedure is not unreasonable or arbitrary there are no constitutional limitations relieving them from conforming to it.”
- finding notice of 30 days to be adequate
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed North Laramie Land Co. v. Hoffman. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 192 opinions
Headnotes
- Constitutional Law — State Court Interpretation of Statutes On review of a state court judgment involving the constitutionality of a state statute, the interpretation of the statute adopted by the state court is binding on the Supreme Court, though the Court remains free to determine whether the statute as so interpreted and applied denies rights guaranteed by the Constitution. 268 U.S. at 282
- Constitutional Law — Due Process Under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, property may not be taken for public use without reasonable notice of the proceedings authorized for its taking and without a reasonable opportunity to be heard as to substantial matters of right affected by the taking; whether a state statute offends these requirements is judged by its practical application to the affairs of men as ordinarily conducted. 268 U.S. at 282
- Constitutional Law — Due Process All persons are charged with knowledge of statutory provisions and must conform to statutory procedure that is not unreasonable or arbitrary; statutes providing for the taxation or condemnation of land may adopt a summary procedure and indirect notice, provided the period and method of notice are reasonably adapted to the nature of the proceedings and afford the owner a reasonable opportunity at some stage to protect his property from arbitrary or unjust appropriation. 268 U.S. at 282
- Constitutional Law — Due Process A statutory limitation requiring a landowner to file objections to the establishment of a public road and claims for damages within thirty days after the county board's determination to establish the road is not unreasonable on its face and does not deny due process of law. 268 U.S. at 283
- Constitutional Law — Due Process Notice of the initiation of condemnation proceedings by publication for three successive weeks in three successive issues of an official county newspaper satisfies the requirements of due process of law. 268 U.S. at 284
- Constitutional Law — Due Process The necessity and expediency of taking private property for public use are legislative questions, and a hearing on those questions is not essential to due process of law under the Fourteenth Amendment. 268 U.S. at 284
- Constitutional Law — Due Process With respect to compensation for the taking of property, due process requires that the owner be given an opportunity to be heard upon reasonable notice of the pending proceedings. 268 U.S. at 284
- Constitutional Law — Due Process A State may satisfy due process in fixing compensation for condemned property by having the amount assessed by viewers, subject to an appeal to a court carrying with it the right to have the matter determined upon a full trial, without affording the owner a hearing before the viewers or the governing board. 268 U.S. at 285
- Constitutional Law — Due Process A statutory requirement that all proceedings of the board of county commissioners be published in a county newspaper, together with the public character of the board's meetings, reasonably informs landowners of the date of the board's final decision establishing a road, from which the time to appeal to the district court for a full hearing on damages begins to run, and satisfies the constitutional requirement of an opportunity to be heard. 268 U.S. at 285
NORTH LARAMIE LAND CO.v. HOFFMAN,268 U.S. 276(1925)
45 S.Ct. 491
NORTH LARAMIE LAND COMPANYv. HOFFMAN ET AL.
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WYOMING.
No. 323.
Argued April 14, 1925.
Decided May 11, 1925.
The plaintiff in error, which was plaintiff below, brought
action in the District Court of Platt County, Wyoming, against
the Board of County Commissioners of that county, asserting the
illegality of the establishment of a certain road running through
and appropriating for that purpose part of plaintiff's land. The
petition prayed that the defendants "be perpetually restrained
from taking any further proceedings or doing acts with respect to
locating said proposed road." The defendants appeared and
answered and after hearing upon the issues of law and fact,
judgment of the District Court was entered denying relief to the
plaintiff. Plaintiff there upon removed the cause by petition in
error to the Supreme
Page 278
Court of the State of Wyoming, which affirmed the decree of the
lower court. 30 Wyoming 238.
The case comes here upon assignments of error calling in
question both the constitutionality of the public road law of the
State of Wyoming and the proceedings had under it resulting in
opening the road across the plaintiff's land, on the ground that
such statutes and procedure amounted to a denial of due process
of law and a taking of property without due process of law in
contravention of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Federal
Constitution. The particular grounds of attack are that the
notice of the proceedings was not sufficient to meet the
requirements of the constitutional provision; that there was,
under the provisions of the statute, a denial of an opportunity
to Plaintiff in Error to be heard and that the entire proceedings
were void for want of the sufficient statutory petition for
initiating them.
The applicable statutory provisions, so far as material to the
present inquiry, may be summarily stated as follows:
The Statute of the State of Wyoming, known as the "Road Act,"
Wyoming Compiled Statutes of 1910 as amended by Laws of 1913,
Chapter 73, prescribes the following procedure for the location
and establishment of public roads:
(a) A petition for the establishment of a road signed by ten
or more electors of the County residing within fifteen miles of
the proposed road, may be filed in the office of the County Clerk
(Section 2516).
(b) Upon the filing of the petition, the Board of County
Commissioners, or its chairman, is required to appoint a
disinterested elector, who may be a member of the Board, as a
viewer to determine whether the proposed road is required
(Section 2518).
(c) The viewer is required to report whether the proposed road
is practicable and ought to be established, stating
Page 279
probable cost and such other matters as shall enable the Board to
act understandingly (Section 2518).
(d) If the Board shall determine to establish the road, it is
required to appoint a day, not less than thirty days after such
determination, on or before which date all objections and claims
for damages are required to be filed with the County Clerk
(Section 2524).
(e) By Laws of Wyoming 1913, Chapter 73, (Section 2525) it is
provided "that notice of the proposed establishing of the road
shall be published for three successive weeks in three successive
issues of some official paper published in the county, if any
such there be, and if no newspaper be published therein, such
notice shall be posted in at least three public places along the
line of said proposed or altered road" and the Statute provides
that "publication and posting of such notice shall be a legal and
sufficient notice to all persons owning lands or claiming any
interest in lands over which the proposed road is to be located
or altered." The Statute does not require that the notice shall
state the time within which objections and claims may be filed
and there is no direct statutory requirement that the Board shall
hear objections to the establishment of a road or claims for
damages, although it is given power "to continue all such claims
for a further hearing" until the matter can be disposed of
(Section 2527).
(f) When claims for damages are filed, the Board, "at its next
regular or special meeting, or as soon thereafter as may be
practicable or convenient" is required to appoint three suitable
and disinterested electors of the county as appraisers to view
the road, on a day to be fixed by the Board, and to report in
writing within thirty days fixing the amount of damage sustained
by the claimants (Section 2528).
(g) The appraisers are required to view the ground and fix the
amount of damages sustained by each claimant
Page 280
after allowing for benefits which may accrue by reason of the
location of the road. They may notify claimants of the time and
place of their meeting; and may hear evidence (Section 2530).
(h) At the next meeting of the Board of County Commissioners
after the report of the appraisers has been filed, the Board may
hear testimony and consider petitions and may fix damages,
increasing or diminishing them, and establish the road (Section
2531).
(i) There are no statutory provisions requiring notice of the
meeting of appraisers to be given to claimants or giving to them
a right to be heard, either by the Board of Appraisers or the
Board of County Commissioners to whom the appraisers are required
to report. But from the final decision of the Board establishing
the road and fixing the amount of damages, any applicant for
damages may appeal to the District Court of the County, which has
jurisdiction to determine the amount of the damages in the same
manner as in a court action. Notice of appeal is required to be
filed with the Clerk of the Court within thirty days after the
decision of the Board (Section 2336).
A written instrument purporting to be a petition for location
of the road in question was filed with the Board of County
Commissioners and the Chairman of the Board thereupon appointed
himself a viewer pursuant to Sec. 2524 of the Road Law. Acting in
that capacity, he reported to the Board recommending the
establishment of the road. Public notice dated May 8, 1917, of
the proposed establishing of the road was given by publication,
in accordance with the Statute for four successive weeks, in a
local newspaper, the first publication being dated May 9th and
the last being dated May 30th, 1917. In the form provided by the
Statute and in accordance with a permissive provision of the
Statute (Sec. 2525 as amended), the notice as published contained
the information
Page 281
that all objections to the proposed road and all claims for
damages "must be" filed not later than June 7, 1917. By
stipulation entered into by plaintiff with the Board, the time to
file claims for damages was extended until July 7, 1917. On June
30, 1917, which was after the date fixed by the published notice
for filing objections and claims, and more than thirty days after
the decision of the Board to locate the road and more than thirty
days after publication of the notice, plaintiffs filed objections
to the establishment of the road as unauthorized under the laws
and Constitution of the State of Wyoming and of the United States
and made claim of damages, without specifying any amount, for the
opening of the road.
In the meantime and on June 8, 1917, the Board appointed
appraisers to determine the damages occasioned by the
establishment of the proposed road, directing them to view the
said proposed road for the purpose of determining damages. On the
16th day of June, 1917, they reported that the benefits to be
derived from the road exceeded the damages to land owners. The
proceedings had by the appraisers wereex parteand without
notice to the plaintiff. Thereafter, on August 10, 1917, the
Board of County Commissioners of Platt County took final action
establishing the road in accordance with the petition and took no
action fixing or determining the damages of any claimant.
Plaintiff took no appeal from the determination of the County
Commissioners authorizing the location of the road as provided by
Section 2536, and on November 30, 1917, brought its action for an
injunction.
No brief filed for defendants in error.Page 282
The Supreme Court of Wyoming held that the procedure followed complied with the statutory requirements. By that determination we are bound.American Land Co. v.Zeiss,219 U.S. 47;QuongHam Wah Co. v.Industrial Accident Commission,255 U.S. 445. That court also held that under the terms of the Statute, Section 2524, the time for filing objections to the establishment of the road and claims for damages could not be extended by the Board of County Commissioners and that the plaintiff having failed to file its objection and claim within the statutory period, was thereby foreclosed from further proceedings under it. By this interpretation of the meaning and effect of the Statute. of Wyoming we are likewise bound, but we are nevertheless free to inquire whether the Statute as interpreted and applied by the State Court denies rights guaranteed by the Constitution and to consider the contention of plaintiff in error that the Statute itself is unconstitutional because of the insufficiency of the required notice of the proceedings had under it, and because by it plaintiff was denied a hearing within the meaning of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Under the requirements of that Amendment, property may not be taken for public use without reasonable notice of the proceedings authorized for its taking andPage 283without reasonable opportunity to be heard as to substantial matters of right affected by the taking. But a state statute does not contravene the provisions of that Amendment unless, in some substantial way, it infringes the fundamental rights of citizens and, in passing on the constitutionality of a state law, its effect must be judged in the light of its practical application to the affairs of men as they are ordinarily conducted.
All persons are charged with knowledge of the provisions of statutes and must take note of the procedure adopted by them; and when that procedure is not unreasonable or arbitrary there are no constitutional limitations relieving them from conforming to it. This is especially the case with respect to those statutes relating to the taxation or condemnation of land. Such statutes are universally in force and are general in their application, facts of which the land owner must take account in providing for the management of his property and safeguarding his interest in it. Owners of real estate may so order their affairs that they may be informed of tax or condemnation proceedings of which there is published notice, and the law may be framed in recognition of that fact. In consequence, it has been uniformly held that statutes providing for taxation or condemnation of land may adopt a procedure summary in character, and that notice of such proceedings may be indirect, provided only that the period of notice of the initiation of proceedings and the method of giving it are reasonably adapted to the nature of the proceedings and their subject matter and afford to the property owner reasonable opportunity at some stage of the proceedings to protect his property from an arbitrary or unjust appropriation.Hulingv.Kaw Valley Railway Improvement Co.,130 U.S. 559;Ballardv.Hunter,204 U.S. 241, at p. 262.
The limitation of time provided by the Wyoming Statute for filing notice of objection and claim forPage 284damages to thirty days after the determination of the Board of County Commissioners to establish a public road does not, on its face, appear to be unreasonable and no foundation is laid either in the record or briefs of counsel for the contention that it is, in its practical operation, unreasonable for that purpose, or that by it there was a denial of due process of law. A like or less period of notice by publication has been repeatedly held by this Court to satisfy the constitutional requirements for the initiation of proceedings to enforce assessment or tax liens.Winona St. Peter Land Co. v.Minnesota,159 U.S. 526;Castillov.McConnico,168 U.S. 674,680;Ballardv.Hunter, supra.
So also with respect to judicial proceedings affecting title to land,Arndtv.Griggs,134 U.S. 316;Hamiltonv.Brown,161 U.S. 256, and with respect to the condemnation or appropriation of land for public use,Hulingv.Kaw ValleyRailway Improvement Co., supra; Braggv.Weaver,251 U.S. 57.
There remains for consideration the plaintiff's objection that the statutory method of giving notice of the proposed location of the road under Section 2525 of the Statute was insufficient and that plaintiff was afforded no opportunity for a hearing before either the appraisers or the Board of County Commissioners with respect either to the location of the road or the damage suffered by plaintiff by the opening of the road. The taking of property provided for by the Statute is a taking of land under the direction of public officers for a public use. As was held inBraggv.Weaver, supra, the necessity and expediency of the taking of property for public use "are legislative questions, no matter who may be charged with their decision, and a hearing thereon is not essential to due process in the sense of the Fourteenth Amendment."Joslin Co. v.Providence,262 U.S. 668,678;Georgiav.Chattanooga,264 U.S. 472,483. With respect to the compensationPage 285for the taking, however, due process requires that the owner be given opportunity to be heard, upon reasonable notice of the pending proceedings. SeeBraggv.Weaver, supra.
There being a newspaper published within Platt County, notice of the initiation of the proceedings for the establishment of the road by publication for three successive weeks in three successive issues of some official paper published in the County, is made mandatory by Section 2525 of the Public Road Law of Wyoming, as amended by Chapter 73 of the Laws of Wyoming of 1913, and the requirements of this Statute were fully complied with. These requirements in all material respects are identical with those passed upon by this Court inHulingv.Kaw ValleyRailway Improvement Co., supra, in which it was held that a statute of Kansas providing that the condemnation of land for use for railroad purposes might be effected on thirty days' notice by publication in a newspaper, satisfied all the requirements of due process of law.
And see alsoBraggv.Weaver, supra, holding that in proceedings for the condemnation of property for public use, notice by publication is constitutionally sufficient. See alsoCastillov.McConnico; Ballardv.Hunter; Arndtv.GriggsandHamiltonv.Brown, supra, upholding a like procedure for the foreclosure of assessment or tax liens.
But the plaintiff in error objects to the procedure established by the Statute because, under it, plaintiff was afforded no opportunity for a hearing either before the Appraisers or the Board of County Commissioners, and in consequence, assuming the sufficiency of the notice, there was a denial of due process of law in determining the amount of damage or compensation to be awarded for the taking of plaintiff's property. When there is a constitutional right to a hearing, as was held inBraggv.Weaver, supra, one constitutional method of fixingPage 286damages "among several admissible modes is that of causing the amount to be assessed by viewers subject to an appeal to a court carrying with it a right to have the matter determined upon a full trial." This is the rule adopted in numerous other cases. SeeHulingv.Kaw Valley Railway Improvement Co., supra;Lentv.Tillson,140 U.S. 316, andWinona St. Peter LandCo. v.Minnesota, supra. It is the mode of procedure adopted by the Wyoming Statute. Section 2536 provides for an appeal to the District Court of the County within thirty days after the decision of the Board of County Commissioners establishing the road.
Plaintiff in error does not deny the soundness of the rule, but questions its applicability to the present case on the ground that the procedure established by the Statute affords no means of ascertaining at what time the final decision of the Board of County Commissioners establishing the road is made, and consequently when the time to appeal to the District Court, as provided by Section 2536, begins to run. It is urged that notwithstanding the fact that the Board of County Commissioners may lawfully meet and reach a final decision, and notwithstanding the fact that the Board in the present case kept minutes and recorded its action in making final decision to establish the road in question, nevertheless the law provides for no public record from which the decision of the Board may be ascertained and claimants are denied any legal means of ascertaining whether in fact such action has been taken.
In making this contention, plaintiff in error overlooks the plain effect of Sections 1413 and 1424 of the Compiled Statutes of Wyoming of 1920 which were in force at the time of the proceedings in question. By Section 1413 it is provided that all meetings of the Board of County Commissioners are public meetings, and Section 1424 requires that all proceedings of the Board of CountyPage 287Commissioners shall be published in a newspaper of the County and the County Clerk is required to furnish such paper with a copy of the proceedings of each meeting for that purpose, within forty-eight hours after adjournment. No contention was made in the courts below or here that the requirements of these sections of the law were not complied with, and there is no basis for such contention in the assignments of error.
Having in mind the character of the procedure in condemnation proceedings and the numerous decisions of this Court, to which reference has been made, establishing what is a due procedure in this class of cases, we have no hesitancy in holding that the method provided by Section 1424 of giving notice of the final decision of the Board of County Commissioners establishing the road is reasonably adapted to the other procedure laid down in the Statute, that it affords reasonable opportunity to claimants to ascertain the fact and that it satisfies all constitutional requirements. A land owner who had notice of the initiation of the proceedings for the opening of the road published in accordance with the Statute, which notice as we have seen under the decisions of this Court is constitutionally sufficient, would have experienced no practical difficulty in ascertaining when the Board of County Commissioners took final action, and by filing notice of appeal to the District Court within thirty days thereafter, he could have secured the full hearing to which he is constitutionally entitled. Having failed to adopt such procedure, the plaintiff cannot complain of a denial of due process of law.
The judgment of the Supreme Court of Wyoming isAffirmed.Page 288