Legal Opinion

Core v. McWilliams Co., Inc.

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided October 24, 1927PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWood, J.

This is an action by the appellants, landowners and taxpayers of Road Improvement District No. 7 of Poinsett County, Arkansas, against the appellees to recover the sum of $31,890.77. It is unnecessary for the purposes of the decision to set out the whole complaint. It is conceded that the only question in the case is whether or not the action is barred by the statute of limitations. The complaint, after setting up the organization of Road Improvement District No. 7 (hereafter, for convenience, called district) and the history of the proceeding leading to the deposit of the money which they…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Suter v. Wenatchee Water Power Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1904
  2. McGaffin v. . City of CohoesNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
  3. Clarke v. School District No. 16Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
  4. Aldrich v. SkinnerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Washington · 1899
  5. Sims v. CraigSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State Use Benefit of Garland Co. v. JonesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1939
  2. Armstrong v. McAdamsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1931
  3. Futrall v. City of Pine BluffCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1937
  4. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. State Ex Rel. Columbia CountySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1939
  5. Opinion No., Arkansas Attorney General Reports2000

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

Powered by the Exa API