Horkan v. City of Moultrie
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtHill, J.
(After stating the foregoing facts.)
Substantially the same questions are raised in the exceptions to the ruling of the court on the demurrer as in the exceptions to the overruling of the motion for new trial, and they will therefore be considered together. From the agreed statement of facts it appears that the City of Moultrie, in May, 1920, passed an ordinance for the paving of a certain part of a certain street in that city, and made an’ assessment against the abutting-property owners, as provided by the act of 1913 (Acts 1913, p. 1062); and that subsequently the city caused the ordinance…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- French v. Barber Asphalt Paving Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1901
- Phillip Wagner, Inc. v. LeserSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Walston v. NevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Embree v. Kansas City & Liberty Boulevard Road DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Withnell v. Ruecking Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1919
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- City of Waycross v. CowartSupreme Court of Georgia · 1927
- Norman v. City of MoultrieSupreme Court of Georgia · 1924
- Walthour v. City of AtlantaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1923
- Fayer v. Mayor of WashingtonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1925
- Harp v. Mayor of ForsythSupreme Court of Georgia · 1952
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.