Koshkonong Mud Creek Drainage District v. Bodeman
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
The following opinion was filed November 7, 1928;
Eschweiler, J.
Such decisions as McMahon v. Lower Baraboo River D. Dist. 184 Wis. 611, 614, 200 N. W. 366; Rusk Farm D. Dist. v. Industrial Comm. 186 Wis. 232, 202 N. W. 204; In re Dancy D. Dist. 190 Wis. 327, 208 N. W. 479, and cases there cited, have so recently declared that these drainage districts are of the nature of quasi-municipal cor*265porations with but limited, and purely statutory, authority, and very restricted, if any, corporate liability, that the general subject need not now be further discussed. Being created as they are solely to…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State ex rel. Zilisch v. AuerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
- In re Dancy Drainage DistrictWisconsin Supreme Court · 1926
- Agnew v. HotchkissWisconsin Supreme Court · 1926
- McMahon v. Lower Baraboo River Drainage DistrictWisconsin Supreme Court · 1924
- Rusk Farm Drainage District v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1925
3Cited by11 opinions
- Madison Metropolitan Sewerage District v. Committee on Water PollutionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1951
- La Crosse Rendering Works, Inc. v. City of La CrosseWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
- Schmitz v. SchmitzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- State Ex Rel. Becker v. Wellston Sewer DistrictSupreme Court of Missouri · 1933
- State Ex Rel. Allen v. MartinOregon Supreme Court · 1970
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.