School District of Plattsburg v. Bowman
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Clinton Circuit Court. — -Ron. A. D. Burnes,, Judge. (1) It was the duty of defendant assessor, at the time of taking the several lists mentioned in the pleadings, to take the number of the school district in which: the taxpayers therein named resided and to mark the-same upon said lists and also on the personal assessment book.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Clinton Circuit Court. — -Ron. A. D. Burnes,, Judge. (1) It was the duty of defendant assessor, at the time of taking the several lists mentioned in the pleadings, to take the number of the school district in which: the taxpayers therein named resided and to mark the-same upon said lists and also on the personal assessment book. Sec. 9844, R. S-,'1899. This duty was first placed upon tbe assessor by tbe amendment of section 7999, Revised Statutes 1889, in 1899. Laws 1899, p. 348. .Prior to this amendment, it was the duty of the school district to furnish the county clerk with an…
1Opinion of the CourtMarshall, J.
This is an action by the School District of Platfsburg, Clinton county, a body politic under article 2 of chapter 154, Revised Statutes 1899, against the defendant Bowman, on his bond as assessor of taxes for Clinton county, and against the other defendants as the sureties on his bond, to-collect, as damages, certain taxes for the year 1900, which it is alleged were lost to the plaintiff, by the act of the assessor in assessing certain tangible personal property, consisting principally of cattle, which was owned by several different partnerships, to the partnerships and in the school…
2Cited by3 opinions
- State v. Houston & T. C. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1918
- Clay, Robinson & Co. v. Douglas CountyNebraska Supreme Court · 1911
- State v. Houston & T. C. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1918