Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Londoner v. City & County of Denver

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided September 15, 1911No. 7122Published

Error to Denver District Court.—Hon. GrEEEEy W. WhiTEORd, Judge.

1ConcurrenceJustice Hiee

specially concurring:

I concur in that 'portion of the opinion wherein it sustains the power of the city and county of Denver to acquire parks and park-ways and to make the necessary assessments therefor, conditional that the provisions of the charter are complied with in so doing. But I cannot agree with the conclusion that the charter has designated the city council as the exclusive body, at all times, to-finally determine whether a proper remonstrance has been filed with the park board and that its right to pass upon-that question, after the findings of the park board, is at *41.all times…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Armstrong v. Ogden CityUtah Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Zeigler v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  3. City of Denver v. LondonerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1905
  4. Keifer v. City of BridgeportSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1896
  5. Fruin-Bambrick Construction Co. v. GeistMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889

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

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

Powered by the Exa API