City of Jefferson v. Whipple
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to Cole Circuit Court. — The case was tried before. S. H. Owens, Esq., sitting as Special Judge. The particular description of the lot sought to be charged, which was stricken out of the petition by stipulation of the parties, was not found on the assessor’s list or the tax books. The description there was simply “Part of inlot numbered 331 on the plat of the city.”
1Per curiam
i. taxes : vague-Son in£taxeSMn This is an action by the City of Jefferson to recover city taxes, and ten per cent penalty, and interest for the years 1866, 1873, 1874, 1875 and 1876, in which the plaintiff claims and by this suit seeks to enforce a lien against “part of inlot No. 331, on the plat of said city,” There was, in the petition as originally filed, a particular description of the part of said lot, sought to be charged with the taxes and lien, but, by stipulation between the parties, the particular description was stricken out, leaving the description of the property as above…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State ex rel. Rosenblatt v. HemanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
- City of St. Louis ex rel. Deppelheuer v. NewmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1869
- Schmidt v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
3Cited by15 opinions
- Hatcher v. State of TexasTexas Supreme Court · 1935
- Burns v. City of NashvilleTennessee Supreme Court · 1919
- State of Missouri v. DaltonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1944
- State ex rel. Flentge v. BurroughSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
- Heman Construction Co. v. LoevyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1896
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.