City of Louisville v. Murphy
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 10 — PETITION EQUITY APPEALS PROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT. 1. It was improper to admit the commissioners of the sinking fund as parties. Until money gets into the sinking fund the power of the commissioners over it does not exist.
Read the full summary
Case 10 — PETITION EQUITY APPEALS PROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT. 1. It was improper to admit the commissioners of the sinking fund as parties. Until money gets into the sinking fund the power of the commissioners over it does not exist. (City Code, 699, sec. 29; Elliott’s Dig., 818; City Code, 631, sec. 5; City Code, sec. 14; Id., 262, sec. 36; Id., 473, sec. 23; Id., 630, sec. 2; McBeynolds v. Smallhouse, 8 Bush, 456; Commonwealth v. Todd, 9 Bush, 713.) 2. A municipal corporation may, in its own name, bring suit in proper cases to be relieved against illegal and fraudulent acts on the part…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Pryor
These two cases, the one in the name oí the City of Louisville against Daniel Murphy and others, and the other in the name of P. B. Reed against the same parties, were heard together in the court below, and argued as one case in this court.
The.object of each action is to enjoin the assessor of *56tlie city of Louisville from including in Ms tax-bills an item of thirty cents on each one hundred dollars’ in value of. taxable property levied to pay the interest on bonds issued by the city to the Louisville, New Albany and St. Louis Railroad, and to the Elizabeth-town and Paducah Railroad. The…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Genois v. LockettSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1839
3Cited by11 opinions
- City of Warren v. DannisMichigan Court of Appeals · 1984
- Harris v. DeSotoHawaii Supreme Court · 1996
- City of Owensboro v. WeirCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1893
- Wiley v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1894
- Exeter Township Clerk v. Exeter Township BoardMichigan Court of Appeals · 1981
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.