Legal Opinion

Lincoln County v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided June 20, 1906No. 14,269PublishedCited by 2 opinions

ERROR to the district court for Lincoln county: Hanson M. Grimes, Judge.

1Opinion of the Court

Albert, 0.

The plaintiff railroad company, the defendant in error in this court, filed its petition against Lincoln county, purporting to state two causes of action. The first is out of the way and requires no further mention. The second is based on section 144, art. I, ch. 77 of the revenue act of 1897, corresponding to section 162 of the same article and chapter of the present revenue law, providing for the recovery of taxes levied for an illegal and unauthorized purpose, when paid under protest. The allegations constituting the second cause of action are, in substance, that in the year 1897…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. v. ElliottCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1900
  2. Jobbins v. GrayAppellate Court of Illinois · 1889
  3. Sours v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
  4. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. County of LincolnNebraska Supreme Court · 1902
  5. Dakota County v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1902

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Truschel v. Rex Amusement Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1926
  2. Geddes v. McElroySupreme Court of Iowa · 1915

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

Powered by the Exa API