Rayl v. Kirby
Indiana Supreme Court
From Howard Circuit Court; William C. Purdum, Judge. Proceedings by William Kirby and others for the construction of a drain, in which William. H. Rayl and others hie remonstrance. From a judgment for petitioners, the remonstrators appeal.
1Opinion
On Petition for Rehearing.
Myers, J.
An ingenious argument is presented by the learned counsel for appellants as to the construction to be given the phrase in the drainage law, respecting the general *562remonstrance, “two-thirds in number of landowners named as such in such petition or who may be affected by any assessment or damages” (damaged), and it is urged, that it means that a remonstrance is sufficient if signed by two-thirds either of those named in the petition, or of those who are affected by an assessment for the drain, and if this be not so, it is asked what meaning, or intent is to be…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Stacy v. Thrasher Ex Rel. SellersSupreme Court of the United States · 1848
- Keiser v. MillsIndiana Supreme Court · 1903
- Cambria Iron Co. v. Union Trust Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1899
- Campbell v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1900
- Zumbro v. ParninIndiana Supreme Court · 1895
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.