Legal Opinion · Dissent

Rex Township v. Bailey Township

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided January 26, 1929No. File No. 6019Published

1Dissent

MISER, C.

(dissenting). I am unable to agree with the majority opinion for the following reasons: The last sentence of section 6039, R. C. 1919, is as follows: “All such divisions and adjustments shall be made, as near as may be, on the basis of the assessed valuation of property in each of such townships, * * * and on the value of such school buildings and other property at the time of such division of such township.”

The report of the board of adjusters is as follows: “We, * * * as a board of adjusters, * * * have -decided that * * * as the valuation of Bailey township is $403,723 and the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Foster v. RitchMontana Supreme Court · 1914
  2. State ex rel. Mountrail County v. AmundsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1912
  3. State Ex Rel. Missoula County v. BrownMontana Supreme Court · 1925

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

Powered by the Exa API