Legal Opinion

Bates v. City of Des Moines

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided March 16, 1926PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMorliNG, J.

I. Keosauqua Way ivas paved, and in the schedule of special assessments for the cost was a proposed levy against two lots belonging to the plaintiff. The district method of assessment was not adopted. A parallel street intervened between plaintiff’s lots and Keosau-qua Way. The trial court annulled the assessment as in violation of Section 6012, Code of 1924, limiting such assessment to one half of the privately owned property between the street improved and the next street. The defendant’s contention is that the objections filed with the city council did not raise this question. We think,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. State v. BriggsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1886
  2. In re Appeal of McLainSupreme Court of Iowa · 1920
  3. Hanaw v. BaileyMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
  4. Snell v. Dubuque & Sioux City Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1893
  5. Nickson v. BlairSupreme Court of Iowa · 1882

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. SedgwickSupreme Court of Iowa · 1927
  2. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Town of DysartSupreme Court of Iowa · 1929
  3. Peoples Investment Co. v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1932
  4. Rivers v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1926
  5. Dickinson v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1926

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

Powered by the Exa API