All owners of real estate situated in the proposed district who have not signed the articles of association and who may object to the organization of the drainage district, after having been duly summoned shall, on or before the second day of the term of court to which they have been summoned to appear, file their objection or objections in writing, if any they may have, why such drainage district should not be organized and declared a public corporation of this state, and why their land will not be benefited by drainage, and should not be embraced in the drainage district and liable to taxation for draining the same. All such objections shall be heard by the court in a summary manner, without any unnecessary delay, and in case such objections are overruled, the district court shall, by its order duly entered of record, declare the drainage district a public corporation of this state. The fact that the district contains one hundred and sixty acres or more of wet, overflowed, or submerged lands shall be sufficient cause for declaring the public utility of such improvements, and shall be sufficient grounds for declaring the organization of a public corporation of this state. In case any owner of such real estate shall satisfy the court that his real estate, or a part thereof, has been wrongfully included in the district, and will not be benefited thereby, then the court may exclude such real estate as will not be benefited, and declare the remainder a district as prayed for.

Annotations

District was organized properly. County of Johnson v. Weber, 160 Neb. 432, 70 N.W.2d 440 (1955).

Where portion of land will not be benefited, it may be excluded. Petersen v. Thurston, 157 Neb. 833, 62 N.W.2d 68 (1954).

Judgment sustaining objections to including lands in drainage district without prejudice to subsequent inclusion does not bar subsequent inquiry. Shepherdson v. Fagin, 116 Neb. 806, 219 N.W. 187 (1928).

After jurisdiction is acquired, the court may permit additional landowners in district to join in articles of association. Henderson v. Holliman, 108 Neb. 67, 187 N.W. 128 (1922).

This act does not contemplate that the question of damages by third persons shall be decided at the hearing upon the application for formation of district, and statute permitting intervention is not applicable. Latham v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., 100 Neb. 173, 158 N.W. 923 (1916).

Facts which court must find to enter order are properly raised by filing of articles. Drainage Dist. No. 1 of Otoe and Johnson Counties v. Wilkins, 93 Neb. 567, 141 N.W. 151 (1913).