Legal Opinion

Green v. Shanklin

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided May 11, 1900No. 3,139PublishedCited by 5 opinions

From the Wells Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtBlack, J.

Tbe city of Bluffton constructed a system of sanitary sewers under the provisions of §4288 et seq. Burns 1894, and §3597a et seq. Burns Supp. This was a suit brought by the assignee of the contractors, under §4294 Burns 1894, to foreclose assessments made on account, of said system of sewers upon two lots in said, city owned by *609Peter S. Green, who did not execute any stipulation waiving objections to illegality or irregularity as to said assessments in consideration of the right to pay them in instalments, and said Green and his wife have appealed from the judgment of foreclosure rendered…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Motz v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1869
  2. Barber Asphalt Paving Co. v. EdgertonIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
  3. Cason v. City of LebanonIndiana Supreme Court · 1899
  4. City of Fort Wayne v. CodyIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
  5. Bozarth v. McGillicuddyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1897

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Town of Woodruff Place v. GormanIndiana Supreme Court · 1912
  2. State, Ex Rel. v. Martin, Aud.Indiana Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Head v. ScurrCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1928
  4. Stott v. Salt Lake CityUtah Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Holloran v. MormanIndiana Court of Appeals · 1901

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API