McGraw v. Whitson
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Clinton Circuit Court. This action was brought to obtain possession of a cow owned by the plaintiff, but wbicb tbe defendant, as marshal of tbe city of Clinton, had impounded under an ordinance of tbe city. Judgment was rendered for tbe plaintiff, and the defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the Court
Adams, Ch. J.
It is not denied that the cow was properly impounded, provided the ordinance under which the defendant acted is valid. But the plaintiff contends that it is not valid. Section 489 of the Code provides that “ ordinances of a general or permanent nature shall be fully and distinctly read on three different days.” The plaintiff contends that this provision was not observed according to its spirit; for while, in one sense, the ordinance Avas read on three different days, it was not, as the statute contemplates, thus read before the same council. The fact appears to be that the third…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Smith v. City of Fort DodgeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1968
- Rutherford v. City of NashvilleTennessee Supreme Court · 1935
- Reuter v. Meacham Contracting Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1911
- Mann v. City of LeMarsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1899
- City of Pasadena v. PaineCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.