Legal Opinion
Kemble v. Weaver
Supreme Court of Iowa
Decided December 15, 1925PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMorling, J.
The claim in question is against the drainage district, and reads: “To two years’ services as attorneys for said district, $4,000.”
I. Plaintiff objects that the statement is not sufficiently itemized. It has been allowed to the amount of $3,000. It is not a claim against the county. The board assumed to have sufficient information to warrant them in such allowance. The action of the board allowing the bill is not the subject of review in this action, in the absence of fraud. The cases cited by plaintiff, Hegele v. Polk County, 92 Iowa 701, Marsh v. Benton County, 75 Iowa 469, and Escher v.…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Nutt v. KnutSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Valdes v. LarrinagaSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- County of Campbell v. HowardSupreme Court of Virginia · 1922
- Cole v. Brown-Hurley Hardware Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1908
- Chippewa Valley & Superior Railway Co. v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1889
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Hays v. City of KalamazooMichigan Supreme Court · 1947
- Hall v. AndersonWashington Supreme Court · 1943
- State Ex Rel. Hunt v. Okanogan CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1929
- Andrew v. BreonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1929