BALTIMORE CITY. 983

Rule as to damages and benefits.

Baltimore v. Megary, 122 Md. 20. (See Section 175A.)

City not liable for consequential damages to property not abutting on the part
of the street closed. Certain rules for determining damages.

Ger. Luth. Church v. Baltimore. 123 Md. 142.

The words "such owner ought to be compensated" construed to mean "such as he
ought to be compensated for under the established rules of law and practice."
Ger. Luth. Church v. Baltimore, 123 Md. 149.

When land is condemned for the bed of a public street, the grade thereof should'
be first established.

Baltimore v. Johnson, 123 Md. 320.

Benefits cannot lawfully be assessed against abutting property until the grade
of the proposed street has been first established.

Patterson v. Baltimore, 124 Md. 153.

The rule that damages are not ordinarily recoverable for injury to adjacent
lands caused by a lawful change in the grade of a public highway is confined to
cases in which no part of the abutting property is taken for that purpose. Where
the grade is established for the first time on opening the street, the cost and
expense of making the abutting land conform to the use of the street should be
considered in determining the extent that such abutting lands are benefited by the
opening.

Baltimore v. Johnson, 123 Md. 320.

The measure of damages is the market value of the land actually to be taken,
and a due allowance of damages for injury to the remaining land.
Patterson v. Baltimore, 124 Md. 153.

In determining whether property will be benefited by a street which is to be
opened, account must be had of the cost of putting the property in condition to.
render it useful after the street is actually opened.

P., B. & W. Railroad v. M. & C. C. of Balto., 124 Md. 635. See also, Balto, v.
Canton Co., 124 Md. 620.

The City has no power to assess benefits which materially amount to more than
the aggregate of damages and expenses. The Commissioners for Opening Streets-
may make a proportionate reduction, or the City Court can do so on appeal.

Maryland Trust Co. v. Baltimore, 125 Md. 40. Balto, v. Md. Trust Co., 135 Md. 36.

Mere inconvenience of access, or mere diminution of light and air to property
does not constitute a "taking" within the meaning of the Constitution. Such injury
to come within the constitutional provision must be such as to amount to their
substantial destruction.

Baltimore v. Bregenzer, 125 Md. 78.

Condemnation of Land for Water Supply.—Adaptability of Laud for Reservoir-
Purposes. - Just Compensation includes the Value of the Ground and Due Allowance
for Consequential Damages.—The Market Value of Laud is to be Estimated in
Reference to the Uses and Purposes to which it is Adapted.
Brack v. Baltimore, 125 Md. 378.

As to when lien attaches, see Dyer v. Dobler, 137 Md. 682.

1914, ch. 125.

175A. In any ordinance providing for opening, widening, extending,
straightening or closing any public highway, the Mayor and City Council
may provide that the Commissioners for Opening Streets shall assess upon
the property benefited thereby the entire cost of such opening, widening,
extending, straightening, or closing, including the damages paid for any
property taken therefor and the expenses of the said Commissioners and
Court expenses, if any; the property so benefited may be specified in the
ordinance or left to be determined by the Commissioners. In the event
of the passage of such ordinance, the Commissioners for Opening Streets
in carrying out the same shall apportion the entire expense of such open-
ing, widening, extending, straightening or closing among the various prop-