Legal Opinion

City of South Hutchinson v. Barnum

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided December 7, 1901No. 12,521PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error from Reno district court; M. P. Simpson, judge.

1Per curiam

The defendant in error commenced this action in the district court of Reno county against plaintiff in error, the city of South Hutchinson, a city of the third class, to recover judgment on several interest coupons detached from certain refunding bonds issued by the city. The defense was that the bonds from which said coupons had been detached'were issued by the city without an ordinance having been passed authorizing their issuance, and that the bonds, therefore, were unauthorized.

It was admitted on the trial that the plaintiff was an innocent holder, and that the persons whose names were…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Town of Coloma v. EavesSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  2. State v. the Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1901
  3. Brown v. Ingalls Tp.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1898
  4. State v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1897
  5. Brown v. Ingalls Tp.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kansas · 1897

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Board of Education v. PowersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1935
  2. Finnup v. School District No. 40Supreme Court of Kansas · 1915
  3. City of Kanopolis v. MountainSupreme Court of Kansas · 1938
  4. Knisely v. School District No. 17Supreme Court of Kansas · 1925

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

Powered by the Exa API