Arnold v. City of Fort Dodge
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Webster District Court. — Hon. D. R. Hind-man, Judge. Action to restrain the collection of a special assessment for guttering and curbing in front of plaintiff’s lots. Judgment for defendants. Plaintiff appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtSherwin, J.
In August, 1892, the city of Ft. Dodge contracted for, and soon thereafter constructed, a gutter and curb along certain streets upon which the plaintiff’s land abutted, and assessed thereto a share of the cost of such gutter and curb. The plaintiff seeks to enjoin the collection of this special tax on several grounds, which we will how notice.
1 2 3 4 It is urged that the notice inviting bids for the work is not such as the law required. On this subject the language of the petition is as follows: “That the city council of Ft. Dodge, defendant herein, did not give notice by publication in two…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Gatch v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1884
- Ford v. Town of North Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1890
- Trustees of Griswold College v. City of DavenportSupreme Court of Iowa · 1885
- Jenney v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1897
- Preston v. City of Cedar RapidsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- City of Bartlesville v. HolmSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
- Owens v. City of MarionSupreme Court of Iowa · 1905
- Lightner v. Board of SupervisorsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1909
- Gilcrest & Co. v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1912
- Newman v. Warner-Quinlan Asphalt Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.