Legal Opinion

STATE, EX REL. v. Urban Renewal Agency of Kansas City

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided April 28, 1956No. 40,184PublishedCited by 47 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Price, J.:

This is an original action in quo warranto to oust defendants from proceeding under the provisions of Chapter 86, Laws of 1955 (G. S. 1955 Supp. 17-4742-4761), commonly known as the Urban Renewal Law.

Allegations of the petition and answer will not be detailed. It is sufficient to say it is contended by plaintiff, and denied by defendants, that the act violates certain provisions of our constitution and is therefore unconstitutional and void. And neither do we consider it necessary to set out in full the act which covers over twenty-one pages…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Berman v. ParkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
  2. State ex rel. Donaldson v. HinesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1947
  3. State Ex Rel. Hawks v. City of TopekaSupreme Court of Kansas · 1954
  4. Winters v. MyersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1914
  5. Hicks v. DavisSupreme Court of Kansas · 1916

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

3Cited by47 opinions

  1. Davis v. City of LubbockTexas Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Brown v. Wichita State UniversitySupreme Court of Kansas · 1976
  3. Samsel v. Wheeler Transport Services, Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1990
  4. State Ex Rel. Anderson v. FadelySupreme Court of Kansas · 1957
  5. Miller v. City of TacomaWashington Supreme Court · 1963

42 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