Legal Opinion

City of Omaha v. Sanitary & Improvement District No. 287

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided July 22, 1983No. Nos. 82-149, 82-150PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtHastings, J.

On the court’s own motion the following portion of its opinion found at ante p. 371, 377, 334 N.W.2d 429, 433 (1983), will be deleted:

“Not only does DKQ fit within this statute but, also, it may find standing under the general rule of law. DKQ has acted as the fiscal agent of S.I.D. since it was formed. As such, DKQ has underwritten construction warrants which have enabled the district to erect improvements. In order to retire the warrants, bonds must be issued to replace them. To enable the district to do so, revenue must be raised, by way of special assessments, to create a *874sinking fund to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Dragstra v. Northwestern State Bank of Orange CitySupreme Court of Iowa · 1971
  2. First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Department of BankingNebraska Supreme Court · 1971
  3. City of Omaha v. Sanitary & Improvement District No. 287Nebraska Supreme Court · 1983

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Sanitary & Improvement District No. 65 v. WefsoNebraska Supreme Court · 1985

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API