Legal Opinion
Inhabitants of Milo v. Milo Water Co.
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided December 8, 1932PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBarnes, J.
On report this action of debt for taxes for the year 1928 comes to this court for final judgment, on so much of the evidence as is legally admissible.
No question of the validity of assessment is in issue.
The plea is the general issue, with brief statement.
*374On May 1, 1909, defendant entered into a contract with the town of Milo to supply the town with pure water for domestic uses, and for protection against fire for the term of twenty years.
By item seven of its contract with the town the defendant company agreed, “to furnish water at the mains so laid for the following purposes, to wit; for…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Gatling v. . Commissioners of CarteretSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
- Tarver v. Mayor of DaltonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1910
- Philadelphia Mortgage & Trust Co. v. City of OmahaNebraska Supreme Court · 1901
- Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co. v. Douglas CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1908
- City of New Orleans v. DavidsonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1878
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Maine School Administrative District No. 15 v. RaynoldsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1980
- A. H. Benoit & Co. v. JohnsonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1964
- Magno v. Town of FreeportSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1985
- State v. BeanSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1963
- Dolloff v. GardinerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1952
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.