Johnson Drainage District, No. 9 v. Hamilton County
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Hamilton District Gourt. — Hon. J. R. Whitaker, Judge. The appellants appealed from an assessment of benefits to the district court where their appeal was dismissed, and, from that judgment, they appeal to this court. —
1Opinion of the Court
Sherwin, J. —
1. Drainageassessment of benefits: railway lands: notice: appeal: statutes: constitutionality. The commissioners appointed to classify the lands and property in the drainage district, and assess the benefits thereto, did not classify the railroad right of way as farm lands were classified, nor did they make any classification thereof . J ..... m. .. . In fragments or subdivisions, ihe railroad 0 ^ Pr0Pei'ty the district consisted of about sixty-seven and a half acres in twenty-one different forties. The benefits were assessed in a lump sum on the entire holding, and the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Zinser v. Board of SupervisorsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1907
- Talke Temple v. Hamilton CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1907
3Cited by8 opinions
- Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. Monona CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1909
- Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. DreessenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1952
- Hatcher v. Board of SupervisorsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1914
- Burt v. Farmers' Co-Operative Canal Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1916
- Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. Board of SupervisorsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1918
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.