Asplund v. City of Santa Fe
New Mexico Supreme Court
1DissentBickley, J.
I can readily give my concurrence to the declaration of the CHIEF JUSTICE that subsections 68, 69 and 70, § 3564, Code 1915, affords power to cities and towns to grant franchises to individuals and incorporated companies to erect, maintain, and operate waterworks. I reach this conclusion because, in my opinion :(1) The language itself, independent of any extraneous, aids, bears that construction;
’(2) Contemporary construction of municipal officers and private utility corporations and legislative construction;(3) The construction of courts of New Mexico and other states having similar…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Pikes Peak Power Co. v. City of Colorado SpringsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1900
- Andrews v. National Foundry & Pipe Works, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1894
- City of Leadville v. Leadville Sewer Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1909
- Port Huron & Northwestern Railway Co. v. RichardsMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
- City of Centerville v. Fidelity Trust & Guaranty Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.