Legal Opinion

Holdcroft v. Murphy

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided February 8, 1939No. File No. 8252PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRoberts, J.

Plaintiff, an interstate operator of motor vehicles for hire, brought this action to enjoin the defendants from enforcing against him certain provisions of the motor vehicle registration law. 'Section 6, chapter 183, Raws 1931, as amended by chapter 169, Raws 1937, provides in part as follows: “The following license fee and compensation for the use of the highways shall be paid annually to the County Treasurer upon application for registration or re-registration of a motor vehicle, except as hereinafter provided, upon the basis of the manufacturer’s weight as follows:” This language is…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Storaasli v. MinnesotaSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. Security National Bank v. TwindeSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Barnsdall Refining Corp. v. WelshSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1936
  4. In re HoffertSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1914
  5. State v. NieuwenhuisSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1926

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Thies v. RennerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Arneson v. BakerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Fauske v. DeanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Burlington Northern Railroad v. GreenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Rapa v. HainesMontgomery County Court of Common Pleas · 1951

6 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