Thacker v. Paving Improvement District No. 5
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Hart, C. J.,
(after stating the facts). At the outset it may be stated that the present suit is direct attack against the validity of the assessments and the organization of the district because it was commenced within thirty days as required by statute. * Williams v. Sewer Imp. Dist. No. 86, 180 Ark. 510, 22 S. W. (2d) 405 ; and Yates v. Phillips, 180 Ark. 709, 22 S. W. (2d) 559.
The first ground upon which the validity of the organization of the district is assailed is that the petition for the improvement and the ordinance creating the same are too indefinite as to the kind of materials to…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- McDonnell v. Improvement District No. 145Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Lewellyn v. St. Imp. Dist. of RussellvilleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
- Selz v. Paving District No. 1 of McGeheeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
- Bostick v. PernotSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1924
- Yates v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. City of Grand ForksNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1955
- Kelley Trust Co. v. Paving Improvement District No. 47Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1932
- Teutsch v. City of Santa FeNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1966
- Laskey v. HiltyOhio Court of Appeals · 1951