Legal Opinion

Dallas County Levee Improvement District No. 6 v. Hengy

Texas Supreme Court

Decided July 16, 1947No. A-1185Published

1Opinion

ON REHEARING.

2Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Alexander

In its motion for rehearing petitioner asserts that a part of the funds received from the sale of the supplemental bonds was used to complete the original plan of reclamation. We fail to find proof of this fact in the record, but doubtless it will be more fully developed upon another trial.

It is undisputed that a part of the funds received from the sale of the supplemental bonds was used for new work not contemplated under the original plan. Since there was never *100any appraisement of the benefits that would accrue to the property owner from the new work contemplated under the…

3Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Stetson v. KemptonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1816
  2. Nalle v. City of AustinTexas Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Dean v. LufkinTexas Supreme Court · 1881
  4. Thomas v. Dallas County Levee Improvement Dist. No. 6Texas Commission of Appeals · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API