Boynton v. District Township
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Ca/rroll Circuit Court. Actions of mandamus. These two cases grew out of similar facts, and involve the same principles.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Ca/rroll Circuit Court. Actions of mandamus. These two cases grew out of similar facts, and involve the same principles. The petitions allege the recovery of a judgment against defendant, in favor of Boynton for the sum of $2,086, and costs; and in favor of Dodge for $3,600.94, and costó; that executions upon said judgments have been issued and returned unsatisfied, no property being found on which to levy; that the board of directors of defendant issued to plaintiffs, judgment orders on said judgments; that it then became the duty of the electors of said district township to levy…
1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.
Preliminary to a consideration of the questions raised by the demurrer, is proper to remark that the petitions for mandamus do not show that the judgments were rendered upon the ordinary evidences of indebtedness of the school-house fund or upon indebtedness contracted subsequent to the year' 1862, as assumed in the first and second assignments of the demurrer. Upon both these questions the petitions are entirely silent. It is true the abstract sets out what purports to be copies of the petitions upon which these judgments were obtained. But these are in no manner referred to in the petitions…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Clark, Dodge & Co. v. City of DavenportSupreme Court of Iowa · 1863
- Cross v. District TownshipSupreme Court of Iowa · 1862
3Cited by8 opinions
- Norris v. Montezuma Valley Irr. Dist.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1918
- State ex rel. Clancy v. Columbia Irrigation DistrictWashington Supreme Court · 1922
- Gates v. SweitzerIllinois Supreme Court · 1932
- Noble v. Yancey.Oregon Supreme Court · 1925
- Stevenson & Rice v. District Township of SummitSupreme Court of Iowa · 1872
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.