City of Topeka v. Imming
Court of Appeals of Kansas
1Opinion of the Court
Hill, J.:
The only question we must answer in this appeal is whether Christopher Imming is entitled to a court order compelling the City of Topeka to either repeal Ordinance No. 19915—an ordinance calling for the City to buy Heartland Park of Topeka— or hold a municipal election and let the voters decide the issue. Because the law creating STAR bonds—the method chosen by the City to finance its purchase—permits a referendum election only in cases where a protest petition is filed and Imming’s petition is not a protest petition, we hold he is not entitled to a writ of mandamus compelling an…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- City of McCall v. BuxtonIdaho Supreme Court · 2009
- Theis v. duPont, Glore Forgan Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1973
- Waterview Resolution Corp. v. AllenSupreme Court of Kansas · 2002
- McAlister v. City of FairwaySupreme Court of Kansas · 2009
- City of Wichita v. Kansas Taxpayers Network, Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1994
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Jayhawk Racing Props., LLC v. City of TopekaCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2018
- City of Wichita v. PeterjohnCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2022
- Jayhawk Racing Properties v. City of TopekaSupreme Court of Kansas · 2021