Mathers v. Moss, Mayor
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
The council of the city of Dumas passed Ordinance No. 120, having a preamble reading as follows: The city of Dumas owns a waterworks system, and the public interest and necessity require that extensions and improvements be made to such system. The city council has caused to be made plans and specifications for such extensions and improvements, an estimate of the construction cost, an estimate of the reasonable rates necessary to be charged for services by said system, and an estimate of the revenues of such system, all of which have been -filed with the city clerk. The council has caused an…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Jernigan v. HarrisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1933
- Snodgrass v. PocahontasSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1934
- Cumnock v. City of Little RockSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1922
- McGehee v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1935
- Arkansas Utilities Co. v. City of ParagouldSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1940
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Laverents v. City of CheyenneWyoming Supreme Court · 1950
- Williams v. Harris, MayorSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1949
- City of Harrison v. BraswellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1946
- Yancey v. City of SearcySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1948
- City of Little Rock v. Chartwell Valley Ltd. PartnershipSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1989
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.