Coolsaet v. City of Veblen
South Dakota Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
FURLER, C.
The question is whether appellant, city of Veblen, is estopped to maintain its appeal to this court, the dismissal of which is demanded by respondents’ motion. Facts sufficient for the purpose of this discussion may be thus stated:
The appellant, city of Veblen, entered into a contract with respondents on June 8, 1921, according to which they were to construct an extension of water mains for the contract price of $7,-910.22 to be paid in cash or in valid assessment certificates against the property benefited by the improvement. After completion and acceptance of the work, the city…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Union Bank of Richmond v. Commissioners of OxfordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
- Salmon v. RathjensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Kelley v. MilanSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Hibernia Savings Etc. Soc. v. WaymireCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Kane v. Independent School District of Rock RapidsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1891
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Montgomery County v. REVERE NATIONAL CORP., INC.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1996
- Le Pire v. Workmen's Compensation BureauNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1961
- State ex rel. Coolsaet v. City of VeblenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1930
- Brown County v. MeidingerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1978
- Gray v. City of Santa FeCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1937
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.