Legal Opinion
City of Defiance v. McGonigale
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided February 2, 1907No. 1,580PublishedCited by 2 opinions
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Ohio.
1Opinion of the Court
EVANS, District Judge.
The plaintiff in error is a city of Ohio of the fourth grade of the second class, and by its council on August 17, 1887, passed an elaborate ordinance granting to Samuel R. Bullock & Co., their associates, successors, and assigns, the right and privilege of erecting, maintaining, and operating a system of waterworks in said city for a period of 30 years. For the purposes of this case it will suffice to set forth part of section 1 and all of section 3 of the ordinance, as follows:
“Section 1. That in consideration of the public benefit to be derived therefrom, the right…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Case v. BeauregardSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Beuttell v. MagoneSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Beuttell v. MagoneSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Bissell v. CouchaineOhio Supreme Court · 1846
- Jeter v. HewittSupreme Court of the United States · 1860
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Interstate Life Assur. Co. v. DaltonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1908
- Moore v. FainCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1918