Legal Opinion
Skaggs v. City of Martinsville
Indiana Supreme Court
Decided December 18, 1894No. 17,135PublishedCited by 11 opinions
From the Morgan Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtHackney, J.
— The appellant has appealed from a judgment of the circuit court assessing a penalty for the violation of an ordinance of the appellee.
The ordinance provides penalties against owners or-occupants of lots for permitting the water from any flowing well or spring to flow upon any of the streets or alleys of said city.
The validity of this ordinance is attacked as violating 'section 21 of the Bill of Rights (R. S. 1894, section 66), which provides that “no man’s property shall be taken by law without just compensation; nor, except in case of the State, without such compensation first assessed and…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus & Indianapolis Railway Co. v. HarringtonIndiana Supreme Court · 1892
- Barnard v. SherleyIndiana Supreme Court · 1893
- Champer v. City of GreencastleIndiana Supreme Court · 1893
- Kyle v. MalinIndiana Supreme Court · 1856
- Coal-Float v. City of JeffersonvilleIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Gradison v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1973
- Shea v. City of MuncieIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
- Town of Avon v. West Central Conservancy DistrictIndiana Supreme Court · 2011
- Swan v. City of IndianolaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1909
- State v. . RiceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.