Harwood v. Brownell
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Floyd District Cowrt. On the 20th day of November, 1877, the plaintiff filed a petition as follows: “That in the month of October, 1868, the Cedar Falls & Minnesota Bailroad Company was engaged in constructing its railroad through Floyd county, and through Floyd township, in said county, and that, for the purpose of aiding said company in the construction of said road, an election was held in said Floyd township, on or about the 29th day of October, 1868, at…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Floyd District Cowrt. On the 20th day of November, 1877, the plaintiff filed a petition as follows: “That in the month of October, 1868, the Cedar Falls & Minnesota Bailroad Company was engaged in constructing its railroad through Floyd county, and through Floyd township, in said county, and that, for the purpose of aiding said company in the construction of said road, an election was held in said Floyd township, on or about the 29th day of October, 1868, at which election the proposition was submitted to the legal voters of said township, in accordance with the provisions of…
1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.
1. taxation: ’statute oi limitations. I. Appellant first discusses and mainly relies upon the seventh ground of demurrer, that it appears from the face tiie petition that the cause of action is barred hy the statute of limitations. It will greatly conciuee clearness if we keep distinctly in view the relief sought in plaintiff’s petition. The petition asks simply — First, that the treasurer be required to enter this tax on the tax book of the current year, as a tax due on the assessment of 1868; second, that he demand immediate payment of said tax of the persons liable to pay the same; third,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Harwood v. QuinbySupreme Court of Iowa · 1876
- Harwood v. CaseSupreme Court of Iowa · 1873
- C., D. & M. R. v. OlmsteadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1877
3Cited by1 opinion
- Dows & Co. v. DaleSupreme Court of Iowa · 1888