Legal Opinion

Arps v. State Highway Commission

Montana Supreme Court

Decided June 11, 1931No. 6,877PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion:

2Per curiam

This action, by reason of its public importance, was begun by plaintiffs in this court to secure an injunction restraining the defendants from issuing or selling state highway treasury anticipation debentures which are authorized by Chapter 95 of the Laws of 1931, generally known as the State Highway Treasury Anticipation Debenture Act, which we shall refer to hereafter as Chapter 95. Upon the filing of the complaint an order to show cause was issued, and upon the return day the defendants filed a motion to quash and also an answer.

1. It is provided in the Act that for the purpose of…

3Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Woodall v. DarstWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Daily Leader v. Cameron, AuditorSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1895
  3. Hilger v. MooreMontana Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Budd v. HancockSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1901
  5. State ex rel. Board of Courthouse & City Hall Com'rs v. CooleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893

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

4Cited by40 opinions

  1. Lowery v. Garfield CountyMontana Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Board of Regents of Higher Education v. JudgeMontana Supreme Court · 1975
  3. State Ex Rel. Sparling v. HitsmanMontana Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Rider v. CooneyMontana Supreme Court · 1933
  5. State Ex Rel. Snidow v. State Board of EqualizationMontana Supreme Court · 1932

35 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