City of Cisco v. Varner
Texas Commission of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtLeddy, J.
The only question presented for our decision is whether the defense of limitation is available to a property holder who . is sued by a city or town to recover the amount of an assessment made by such municipality to cover the cost of paving a street adjacent to property owned by her.
It is insisted that in such a suit the amount sought to be recovered is a tax within the meaning of article 7298, R. S. 1925, to which the statute of limitation has no application. .•This article of the statute reads as follows:
“No delinquent taxpayer shall have the right to plead in any court or in any manner…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Higgins v. BordagesTexas Supreme Court · 1895
- City of Bridgeport v. New York & New Haven RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1869
- Hutcheson v. StorrieTexas Supreme Court · 1899
- In re the Mayor of New-YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1814
- Mayor of Baltimore v. Proprietors of Green Mount CemeteryCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1855
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- City of Bristow Ex Rel. Hedges v. GroomSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1944
- Wichita County Water Improvement District No. 2 v. City of Wichita FallsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1959
- Altman v. KilburnNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1941
- Real Estate Land Title & Trust Co. v. BeryleCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1935
- Bauer v. Texas Pac. Coal & Oil Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1936
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.