Powers v. Village of Chisholm
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for St. Louis county to restrain defendants from issuing bonds for the erection .of a public building.
Read the full summary
Action in the district court for St. Louis county to restrain defendants from issuing bonds for the erection .of a public building. The ease was tried before Hughes, J., who made findings and as conclusions of law found that the village of Chisholm had power under the law to erect a public building for use as a village hall, public market, and public library reading rooms, and to issue its bonds for the purpose of defraying the expenses of erecting the same; that the proposition of issuing such bonds received the affirmative vote of more than five-eighths of thosq voting on the question and…
1Opinion of the CourtDibell, J.
Action by a taxpayer against the village of Chisholm and its officers to restrain the issuance of bonds for the erection of a public building to be used, among other purposes, as a village hall. There were findings and judgment for the defendants and the plaintiff appeals.
The plaintiff contends:(1) That the village had no authority to construct a village hall.(2) That the proposition to issue bonds did not carry at the election,
1. The village of Chisholm is incorporated under Laws 1885, p. 148, chapter 145. It did not reorganize as it was provided by the revision of 1905 that it might. R. L.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bates v. BassettSupreme Court of Vermont · 1888
- Torrent v. Common Council of MuskegonMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
- Anderson v. City of Le SueurSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
- People ex rel. Menomy v. HarrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1853
3Cited by3 opinions
- Halbruegger v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1924
- State ex rel. Village of Chisholm v. TraskSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
- Republican Party of Hawaii v. WaiheeHawaii Supreme Court · 1985