Legal Opinion
Munro v. City of Albuquerque
New Mexico Supreme Court
Decided September 7, 1939No. 4488PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MABRY, Justice.
The plaintiff sought in the district court a declaratory judgment to determine the respective rights of bondholders to collect, and the corresponding duty of the City of Albuquerque to pay interest after maturity upon the principal of certain paving bonds and upon the interest coupons attached to such bonds issued pursuant to the provisions of Section 90-1701, Comp.Laws, 1929.
The plaintiff, a bondholder, alleges in his complaint, the allegations of which are admitted by the defendant, that he is • the owner and holder of two bonds in Pav-. ing District No. 19 of the said city;…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- United States v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Carr v. State ex rel. CoetlosquetIndiana Supreme Court · 1891
- Meyer v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- State Ex Rel. Ackerman v. City of CarlsbadNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1935
- Tennessee Bond Cases Stevens v. Memphis & C. R. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1885
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Munro v. City of AlbuquerqueNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1943
- Purcell v. City of CarlsbadCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1942
- Bateman v. Kennecott Copper Corp.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1969
- Dexter v. Lakeshore City Sanitation DistrictNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1971