Armstrong v. Ogden City
Utah Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment upon demurrer of tire district court of the fourth district, Hon. James A. Miner, judge. The opinion states the facts, except the following: The allegations as to the filing of objections were as follows: “That on March 29, 1892, at 9:55 o’clock A. m., certain persons protested against the levy of this special tax, and afterwards and before action was taken upon that petition, certain other owners of property objected in writing to the levy of such…
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment upon demurrer of tire district court of the fourth district, Hon. James A. Miner, judge. The opinion states the facts, except the following: The allegations as to the filing of objections were as follows: “That on March 29, 1892, at 9:55 o’clock A. m., certain persons protested against the levy of this special tax, and afterwards and before action was taken upon that petition, certain other owners of property objected in writing to the levy of such special tax, and that the whole number of feet owned by those persons first protesting, and other than those last named,…
1Opinion of the Court
Zane, C. J.:
This is an appeal from an order of the court below sustaining a general demurrer to plaintiffs’ complaint, in which numerous facts are alleged, and a prayer for an *258injunction restraining the levy of a tax for paving Twenty-Fifth street, in district No. 2, in Ogden City, and from a judgment of the court against the plaintiffs after they had ■elected to stand on their complaint. The plaintiffs claim-that the facts stated in the notice of intention to levy the ’tax were insufficient to authorize the levy. It is as follows: ■“ Notice of intention of the city council of Ogden City of…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Armstrong v. Ogden CityUtah Supreme Court · 1895
- Branting v. Salt Lake CityUtah Supreme Court · 1915
- Stott v. Salt Lake CityUtah Supreme Court · 1915
- Jones v. FoulgerUtah Supreme Court · 1915