Legal Opinion

McKenzie v. Mukilteo Water District

Washington Supreme Court

Decided May 10, 1940No. 27804PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJeffers, J.

Plaintiff, Emma McKenzie, instituted this action against Mukilteo Water District and Sylvester Stumfall, as treasurer of Snohomish county, to restrain defendants from in any manner attempting to collect a local improvement assessment in local improvement district No. 8, created in and by the Mukilteo water district, and further asked to have her land declared free and clear from the lien of such assessment and to have her land stricken from the assessment roll.

After a hearing, the court, on July 22, 1939, entered judgment awarding to plaintiff the relief prayed for. A motion for new trial was…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Grenada County Supervisors v. BrogdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Los Angeles City Water Co. v. City of Los AngelesU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern California · 1898
  3. Robb v. City of TacomaWashington Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Drum v. University Place Water DistrictWashington Supreme Court · 1927
  5. Murray v. Department of Labor & IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 1929

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

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. State v. WanrowWashington Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Godfrey v. WashingtonWashington Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Tyler Pipe Industries, Inc. v. Department of RevenueWashington Supreme Court · 1982
  4. City of Seattle v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Jepson v. Department of Labor & IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 1977

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

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

Powered by the Exa API