Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Board of County Com'rs v. City of Wewoka Ex Rel. North

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided June 30, 1942No. 30042Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partGibson, J.

I agree with paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of the syllabus of the majority opinion, but not with the 4th paragraph thereof or that part of the opinion dealing therewith. The importance of the questions involved justify this expression of my views.

The bonds in question were issued in 1924 pursuant to chapter 173, S. L. 1923 (11 O. S. 1941 §§ 21 et seq.). The annual installments thereon remained unpaid for the years 1931, 1932, and 1933, and on May 13, 1937, • plaintiffs instituted this action to foreclose the assessment lien as provided by said section 107. While the action was still pending the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Service Feed Co. v. City of ArdmoreSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  2. Blythe v. PrattSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  3. Runnells v. Citizens Nat. BankSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932

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

Powered by the Exa API