Legal Opinion

In re Paving Floyd Park Addition

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided January 8, 1924PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The following opinion was written by the late Justice Weaver, and is now adopted as the opinion of the court.

Per Curiam:.

It is to be kept in mind from the outset of this discussion that, aside from the alleged excess and inequality of the special assessments, the authority of the council to order the paving and cause the work to be done stands unchallenged. Except in the respect mentioned, the regularity of the proceedings is unquestioned. No complaint is made of the quality of the work, or that the paving as made is anything other than was contemplated by the petitions therefor. The sole…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Spencer v. MerchantSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  2. Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Barber Asphalt Paving Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1905
  3. Paulsen v. PortlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
  4. Jordan v. Iowa Mutual Tornado InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1911
  5. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. City of CentervilleSupreme Court of Iowa · 1915

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. City of Dallas v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1933
  2. Rood v. City of AmesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1953
  3. Gingles v. City of OnawaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1950
  4. Lytle v. City of Sioux CitySupreme Court of Iowa · 1924
  5. Diesing v. City of MarshalltownSupreme Court of Iowa · 1925

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API