1. Upon review of a judgment of a state court involving the
constitutionality of a state statute, the interpretation of the
statute adopted by the state court is binding on this Court. P.
268 U. S.
282.
2. The Wyoming Road Law (Comp.Stat. 1910, as amended, §
2524) limits the time within which a landowner may file
objections
Page 268 U. S. 277
to the establishment of a road and claim for damages to thirty
days after the Board of County Commissioners determines to
establish it.
Held, reasonable and consistent with the due
process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. P.
268 U. S.
282.
3. The necessity and expediency of taking private property for a
public road are legislative questions, to a decision of which a
hearing of the landowner is not essential under the Fourteenth
Amendment. P.
268 U. S.
284.
4. The Wyoming Road Law,
supra, provides that notice of
proposed establishment of a road by the Board of County
Commissioners shall be published for three successive weeks in
three successive issues of some official paper published in the
county, that there shall be an appraisal, when claims for damages
are filed, and that any applicant for damages may, within thirty
days after the final decision of the board establishing the road
and fixing the damages, appeal to the district court of the county,
which has jurisdiction to determine the amount of damages in the
same manner as in a court action. Under Comp.Stats. Wyo.
§§ 1413, 1424, the meetings of the board are public, and
all their proceedings must be promptly published in a newspaper of
the county.
Held that this procedure affords due process
to the landowner on the matter of damages, since the hearing in the
district court makes unnecessary a hearing before the board or the
appraisers, and, through the publication of the board's action, the
landowner is duly notified of the date from which his time for
appeal begins to run. P.
268 U. S.
285.
30 Wyo. 238 affirmed.
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 thereupon removed the cause by petition in error to the
Supreme
Page 268 U. S. 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 268 U. S. 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 268 U. S. 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 268 U. S. 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 landowners. The proceedings had by the
appraisers were
ex parte, and 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.
Page 268 U. S. 282
MR. JUSTICE STONE, after stating the case as above, delivered
the opinion of the Court.
In the Supreme Court of Wyoming, on error to the District Court
of Platt County, plaintiff urged various technical objections to
the procedure had under the Road Law of Wyoming for the
establishment of the proposed road, particularly that the petition
for the establishment of the road was insufficient within the
provisions of the statute and also duly presented to the court for
its consideration, the constitutional objections which are urged
here.
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;
Quong Ham Wah Co. v. Industrial Accident
Commission, 255 U. S. 445.
That court also held that, under the terms of the statute, §
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 and
Page 268 U. S. 283
without 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 landowner 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.
Huling v.
Kaw Valley Railway & Improvement Co., 130 U.
S. 559;
Ballard v. Hunter, 204 U.
S. 241, at
204 U. S.
262.
The limitation of time provided by the Wyoming statute for
filing notice of objection and claim for
Page 268 U. S. 284
damages 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;
Castillo v. McConnico, 168 U.
S. 674,
168 U. S. 680;
Ballard v. Hunter, supra.
So also with respect to judicial proceedings affecting title to
land,
Arndt v. Griggs, 134 U. S. 316;
Hamilton v. Brown, 161 U. S. 256, and
with respect to the condemnation or appropriation of land for
public use,
Huling v. Kaw Valley Railway & Improvement Co.,
supra; Bragg v. 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 § 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 in
Bragg v.
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,
262 U. S. 678;
Georgia v. Chattanooga, 264 U. S. 472,
264 U. S. 483.
With respect to the compensation
Page 268 U. S. 285
for the taking, however, due process requires that the owner be
given opportunity to be heard, upon reasonable notice of the
pending proceedings.
See Bragg v. 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 § 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 in
Huling v. Kaw Valley Railway &
Improvement Co., supra, in which it was held that a statute of
Kansas providing for 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 also Bragg v. Weaver, supra, holding that, in
proceedings for the condemnation of property for public use, notice
by publication is constitutionally sufficient.
See also
Castillo v. McConnico, Ballard v. Hunter, Arndt v. Griggs, and
Hamilton v. 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 in
Bragg v.
Weaver, supra, one constitutional method of fixing
Page 268 U. S. 286
damages,
"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.
See Huling
v. Kaw Valley Railway & Improvement Co., supra; Lent v.
Tillson, 140 U. S. 316, and
Winona & St. Peter Land Co. 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 §
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 §§ 1413 and 1424 of the Compiled Statutes
of Wyoming of 1920, which were in force at the time of the
proceedings in question. By § 1413, it is provided that all
meetings of the board of county commissioners are public meetings,
and § 1424 requires that all proceedings of the board of
county
Page 268 U. S. 287
commissioners 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 § 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 landowner 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 is
Affirmed.
