Legal Opinion

Thompson v. Goble

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided July 21, 1937No. 6451Published

1Opinion

ON PETITION FOB REHEARING.

AILSHIE, J.

A petition for rehearing has been filed and we infer from its contents that counsel have not noted the distinctions we have heretofore made between the “aggregate apportionment of benefits to be paid in a number of installments” by property owners in an improvement district and the ‘1 annual installment assessments as spread on the tax rolls for a specific year.” (See Smith v. City of Nampa, 57 Ida. 736, 68 Pac. (2d) 344.) It is the latter instalment assessments to which reference was made in the original opinion herein wherein it is said: “Consequently…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Smith v. City of NampaIdaho Supreme Court · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API