GALYON v. CHICKASHA MILLING CO.

Annotate this Case

GALYON v. CHICKASHA MILLING CO.
1937 OK 221
67 P.2d 781
180 Okla. 77
Case Number: 26392
Decided: 04/06/1937
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

GALYON, County Treas.
v.
CHICKASHA MILLING CO.

Syllabus

¶0 1. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW -- Statutes -- Ratification by Legislature of Whatever Was Within Its Inherent Power to Authorize.
Whatever is within the inherent power of the Legislature to authorize, it can, in the absence of constitutional restriction, subsequently ratify, and such ratification is equivalent to an original grant of power, operative by relation as of date of the particular thing ratified.
2. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS -- Effect of Curative Statute Validating Ordinances Annexing Territory to Corporate Limits.
Section 5990, O.S.1931 (11 Okl.St.Ann. § 1), is a curative statute intended to ratify ordinances of cities annexing adjacent territory to their corporate limits, and such statute validated, ab initio, an ordinance passed for that purpose pursuant to the act of 1895, now section 6130, O.S.1931 (11 Okl.St.Ann. § 481), although the ordinance may have been void by reason of the omission of certain procedural requirements specified in the act.

Appeal from District Court, Comanche County; E. L. Richardson, Judge.

Action by the Chickasha Milling Company against A. P. Galyon, county treasurer of Comanche county, Okl. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed.

Charles E. Bledsoe, of Lawton, and Bailey & Hammerly, of Chickasha, for plaintiff in error.
Melton & Melton, of Chickasha, for defendant in error.

GIBSON, Justice.

¶1 This action was commenced in the district court of Comanche county by defendant in error against the plaintiff in error, the county treasurer, to recover certain alleged illegal taxes paid under protest.

¶2 The tax objected to and sought to be recovered represented the 1930 and 1931 levy made for municipal purposes in the city of Lawton, and recovery is sought upon the theory that the property taxed was not located in the city.

¶3 The property in question is a portion of a certain tract of land sought to be annexed to the city of Lawton by Ordinance No. 76, passed by the city council August 28, 1902; and the point to be determined on this appeal is whether the ordinance was effective to annex the area to the corporate limits of the city.

¶4 The trial court rendered judgment for the taxpayer, and the county treasurer has appealed.

¶5 The controlling facts in this case are in all respects the same as the facts in the case of Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Galyon (Okl.Sup.) 66 P. (2d) 1066, this day decided, and that decision is controlling here, and is adopted as the decision in this case.

¶6 The judgment of the trial court is therefore reversed.