Ampt v. City of Cincinnati
Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati
1Opinion of the CourtHosea, J.
1. Suit is brought by the plaintiff, in his capacity of tax-payer under the statute (Section 1778) in that behalf, to restrain operation of a contract entered into by and between the “Board of Trustees, Commissioners of Water Works,” in behalf of the city of Cincinnati, on the one part, and the Cincinnati, Georgetown & Portsmouth Railroad Company, on the other, on December 10, 1901.
For the sake of brevity, a detailed recital of the pleadings, and the documentary and other evidence submitted in the cause, and the many points made in the very able arguments of counsel, being unnecessary, only…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- M'culloch v. State of MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1819
- Union Pacific Railway Co. v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Union Pac. Ry. Co. v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1892
- Mazet v. City of PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
- Pikes Peak Power Co. v. City of Colorado SpringsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1900
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.