City of Perry v. Davis & Younger
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Error from the District Gourt of Noble Gounty; beforei ■ Bayard T. Hairier, Trial Judge STATEMENT 01? PACTS. This action was brought by defendants in error in the district court of Noble county under the provisions of article one (1), chapter six (6) of the session laws of 1903, to enjoin the city of Perry from collecting a tax levied by the city to pay for the construction of a district sewer in sewer district number one (1). Mike Conway, as county treasurer, was made a…
Read the full summary
Error from the District Gourt of Noble Gounty; beforei ■ Bayard T. Hairier, Trial Judge STATEMENT 01? PACTS. This action was brought by defendants in error in the district court of Noble county under the provisions of article one (1), chapter six (6) of the session laws of 1903, to enjoin the city of Perry from collecting a tax levied by the city to pay for the construction of a district sewer in sewer district number one (1). Mike Conway, as county treasurer, was made a party defendant to prevent the collection of the tax. Will T. Plummer was the contractor who constructed the sewer for…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the court by
Garber, J.:
The issues to be determined in this controversy were presented by the original pleadings in the court below, and will be considered here in the order therein stated. o :
Article one (1) of chapter six (6) of the session laws of 1903, under which the city council proceeded in the construction of the sewer provides:
“That in municipal corporations having a bona, fide population of not less than one thousand persons, the mayor and councilmen shall have power to cause a general sewer system to be established, which shall be composed of three classes of sewers, to…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Davidson v. New OrleansSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Hagar v. Reclamation District No. 108Supreme Court of the United States · 1884
- County of Mobile v. KimballSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Shoemaker v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- French v. Barber Asphalt Paving Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1901
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- City of Chickasha v. O'BrienSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
- City of Bartlesville v. HolmSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
- City of Muskogee v. RamboSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
- Alley v. City of MuskogeeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Norris v. City of LawtonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.