Mahomet v. Quackenbush
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE CIROUIT COURT OF THE HNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. The case is stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
• Me. Chief Justice Waite
delivered the opinion of the court.
The facts of this case are identical with those of Anderson v. Santa Anna, 116 U. S. 356, except that here the bonds were issued by one township on the line of the Danville., 'Urbana, Bloomington and Pekin Railroad, and there by another. The , bonds in the two cases are the same in form and the statutory authority for their issue the same. All questions actually decided in the other case are concluded in this, but one point is made now that was not presented, then, and it arises on these facts:
Art. 3, § 23 of the Illinois…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Pelton v. National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Anderson v. Santa AnnaSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- People ex rel. Klokke v. WrightIllinois Supreme Court · 1873
- Board of Supervisors of Schuyler County v. People ex rel. Rock Island & Alton RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1860
- Ackley School District v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Blair v. City of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- State v. BeckerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1892
- New England Mortgage Security Co. v. GaySupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Hotchkiss v. MarionMontana Supreme Court · 1892
- Diana Shooting Club v. LamoreuxWisconsin Supreme Court · 1902
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.