State ex rel. City of Duluth v. District Court
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Proceedings were commenced by the village of West Dulutli under Laws 1891, c. 146, sube. 9, for tbe purpose of making certain street improvements. After letting the contract an assessment of ■85 per cent, of the estimated cost of $108,000 was made. After the work was finished, it was found that there was a deficiency in the cost of $48,277.97 over the first assessment, and a second assessment was levied to pay such deficiency.
Read the full summary
Proceedings were commenced by the village of West Dulutli under Laws 1891, c. 146, sube. 9, for tbe purpose of making certain street improvements. After letting the contract an assessment of ■85 per cent, of the estimated cost of $108,000 was made. After the work was finished, it was found that there was a deficiency in the cost of $48,277.97 over the first assessment, and a second assessment was levied to pay such deficiency. From the confirmation of the latter assessment Martha H. Norton, as executrix, and others, and also Northwestern Loan and Investment Company appealed to the district…
1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.
For the purpose of making certain street improvements in the village, of West Duluth in the year 1891, steps were taken by the village council, in accordance with the provisions of Laws 1891, c. 146, sube. 9 (G. S. 1894, §§ 1337-1353). The cost of the proposed improvements was estimated at $108,000 by the village engineer, and after the work-had been placed under contract the council proceeded to make an assessment of 85 per cent, of the estimate, as required by the terms of Laws 1891, c. 146, sube. 9, § 5 (G. S. 1894, § 1341). After the completion of the work, which cost much more than was…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State ex rel. Board of Courthouse & City Hall Com'rs v. CooleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- State ex rel. Stateler v. ReisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
- State ex rel. Chapin v. District CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
3Cited by11 opinions
- State ex rel. Douglas v. WestfallSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1902
- Flynn v. Little Falls Electric & Water Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- State ex rel. Anderson v. SullivanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- State ex rel. Oliver Iron Mining Co. v. City of ElySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
- Board Trustees Firemen's Pension Fund v. McCroryCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1909
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.