Legal Opinion

St. Louis-S. F. R. v. Choctaw County Excise Board

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided June 25, 1935No. 25636PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWelch, J.

The first question involves the general fund of Choctaw county. Protestant contends that there was a surplus balance to the credit of the general fund of $541.98, which the taxing officials were required to use, but failed to use, as an Item of financing the appropriations. The taxing officials claim there was no surplus balance to the credit of such fund, but on, the contrary that there was a deficit in the sum of $1,026.68. No surplus balance was used or considered by the excise board in calculating the rate of levy, nor did they estimate any receipts from back taxes.

A surplus balance, as…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. C. D. Coggeshall & Co. v. SmileySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929
  2. Protest of BledsoeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932
  3. In Re MonsellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1930
  4. Protest of Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
  5. Protest of DowningSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Wilson v. City of HollisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1943
  2. Versluis v. Town of Haskell, Okl.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1946
  3. Paganini v. Town of Corte MaderaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
  4. Kurn v. HelmSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1938
  5. People Ex Rel. Smith v. City of San JoseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API