Welborn v. Whitney
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
1DissentHurst, J.
I dissent. I think the majority opinion does violence to the letter and spirit of 68 O. S. 1941 §§ 452, 453, and section 1, ch. 159, S. L. 1933.
The question presented is of sufficient importance to justify a statement of the reasons for my dissent. It affects land titles in every community in the state, and has to do with the collection of revenue necessary to finance local functions of government in the school districts, cities, towns, and counties. When the local units are not financed locally, they are compelled to call upon the state to assist, and when the state shares its revenue with…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Hagar v. Reclamation District No. 108Supreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Bowman v. CockrillSupreme Court of Kansas · 1870
- Saranac Land & Timber Co. v. Comptroller of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Allen v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- Straus v. FoxworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.