Harwood v. Case
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Floyd District Gourt. Wednesday, December 17. The petition alleges in substance that at an election duly beld in tbe township of Floyd, in Floyd county, on the 29th. day of October, 1868, pursuant to the proper petition of resident tax payers and order of the township trustees, a tax of five per cent was voted in aid of the construction of the Cedar Falls & Minnesota Railway, as provided by chapter 18, Laws 12th general assembly.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Floyd District Gourt. Wednesday, December 17. The petition alleges in substance that at an election duly beld in tbe township of Floyd, in Floyd county, on the 29th. day of October, 1868, pursuant to the proper petition of resident tax payers and order of the township trustees, a tax of five per cent was voted in aid of the construction of the Cedar Falls & Minnesota Railway, as provided by chapter 18, Laws 12th general assembly. That on the 16th of December, 1868, the trustees ordered a levy of five per cent for such purpose upon all the taxable property of the township. That the…
1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.
I. The third ground of demurrer, and which the court sustained is as follows:
i. taxation. “ The petition does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action in this: That it does not state that the president or managing director of the Cedar Falls an(} Minnesota Bailroad Company has drawn an order on the treasurer, defendant, for the amount of said tax, and that such order has been presented to said treasurer for payment, accompanied with estimates of the engineer in charge of the work on said road, showing that an amount equal to the amount of the tax has been expended by said…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Byers v. RodabaughSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
3Cited by5 opinions
- Simmermaker v. International Harvester Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1941
- Sword v. SprySupreme Court of Iowa · 1927
- Harwood v. BrownellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1878
- Casady v. LowrySupreme Court of Iowa · 1878
- W. & L. E. Ry. Co. v. StewartHarrison Circuit Court · 1896