Legal Opinion

St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co. v. Forbes

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided June 23, 1925No. 14881PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

LOGSDON, C.

Plaintiff’s numerous assignments of error are presented in its brief under three propositions substantially as follows; First, that the trial court erred in susiaining the demurrer of defendant to plaintiff’s evidence relating to illegal levies for county purposes; second, that the trial court erred in sustaining sijd demurrer to plaintiff’s evidence relating to the general fund levy for Cyril City; third, that the trial court likewise erred in sustaining said demurrer to plaintiff’s evidence relating to the sinking fund levy- for Cyril City.

The county tax levy included…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co. v. McIntoshSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
  2. St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. HaworthSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
  3. St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. AmendSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
  4. Board of Com'rs of Oklahoma Co. v. Barber Asphalt Paving Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1921
  5. Payne v. RossSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. C. D. Coggeshall & Co. v. SmileySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929
  2. Jones v. BlaineSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
  3. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. v. Washington CountySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929
  4. Rogge v. Petroleum CountyMontana Supreme Court · 1938
  5. Protest of St. Louis-S. F. Ry. C.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API