Legal Opinion
Bower v. City of Bainbridge
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided April 13, 1929No. 6972PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHines, J.
(After stating the foregoing facts.)
Was the contract for the paving of these sidewalks a valid one? Section 6 of the act of August 10, 1920, amending the charter of the City of Bainbridge (Acts 1920, pp. 741, 743), provides that, thirty days after the date of the passage of an ordinance apportioning and levying assessments for street improvements, the Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Bainbridge shall by resolution provide for the issuance of bonds for the amount of such assessments, and in the manner more fully prescribed in said section. It contains this further provision: “Said bonds shall…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Holt v. ParsonsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Montgomery v. City of AtlantaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1926
- City of Bainbridge v. JesterSupreme Court of Georgia · 1924
- Raines v. ClaySupreme Court of Georgia · 1926
- Sanders v. MayorSupreme Court of Georgia · 1914
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Campbell v. City of PlymouthMichigan Supreme Court · 1940
- Bass v. Mayor of MilledgevilleSupreme Court of Georgia · 1934
- Georgia Power Co. v. City of DecaturSupreme Court of Georgia · 1935
- Commonwealth Public Service Co. v. City of Deer LodgeMontana Supreme Court · 1934
- National Linen Service Corp. v. Mayor of MilledgevilleCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1935
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.