Legal Opinion
Drainage Dist. 7 Poinsett Cty. v. Exchange Trust
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Decided January 9, 1928PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Hart, C. J.,
(after stating the facts). The decree of the chancellor was based upon a holding that the facts in the case at bar bring it within the principles of law decided in Lee v. Osceola & Little River Road Improvement District No. 1 of Mississippi County, Arkansas, 268 U. S. 647, 45 S. Ct. 620, 69 L. ed. 1133, in which it was held that a State cannot impose special taxes on-lands acquired by private owners from the United States on account of benefits resulting from a road improvement made before the United States parted with its title.
It is earnestly insisted by counsel for appellants…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Wisconsin Central Railroad v. Price CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Wight v. DavidsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1901
- Lee v. Osceola & Little River Road Improvement Dist. No. 1 of Mississippi Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Bothwell v. Bingham CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Nevada National Bank v. Poso Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Luehrmann v. Drainage Dist. No. 7 of Poinsett County, Ark.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1939
- McDonald v. PritzlIdaho Supreme Court · 1939
- Exchange Trust Co. v. Drainage Dist. No. 7, Poinsett Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Ark. State Hwy. Comm. v. Sub-Dist. No. 3Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1964
- John Joseph Kratochvil v. Randy Lee, WardenCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 2017