Heilig v. City Council of Puyallup
Washington Supreme Court
Appeal from Superior Court, Pierce County.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Stiles, J.
The main question in this case is, whether the members of the city council of Puyallup, which is a city of the third class, shall be paid for sitting as a board of equalization in the month of May. The act of March 9, 1893 (Laws, p. 157), amending the act of 1890 providing for the organization of municipal corporations of the second, third and fourth classes, amended § 133 of the act of 1890 (Laws, p. 192) by imposing upon the city clerk the duties of city assessor and abolishing the office of city assessor entirely. Another act (Laws 1893,…
2Cited by22 opinions
- Peavy v. McCombsIdaho Supreme Court · 1914
- State Ex Rel. Gebhardt v. Superior CourtWashington Supreme Court · 1942
- People v. Keith Railway Equipment Co.California Court of Appeal · 1945
- Hammack v. Monroe Street Lumber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1959
- Lambert v. Bd. Trustees Public LibraryCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1913
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.