Legal Opinion

Oxnard Beet Sugar Co. v. State

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided January 5, 1905No. 13,995PublishedCited by 26 opinions

Error to the district court for Lancaster county: Albert J. Cornish, Judge.

1Opinion of the Court

Oldham, C.

The plaintiff below, who is also plaintiff in error in this court, is the manufacturer of sugar from beets grown within this state. Its claim against the state is based on the provisions of chapter I, laws of 1895, entitled “An act to provide for the encouragement of the manufacture of sugar and chicory and to provide a compensation therefor,” passed March 29, 1895, by a constitutional majority, over the governor’s veto. Having complied with all the provisions of this act, it presented its claims for bounty to the auditor of the state, which were audited and approved, and warrants…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. United States v. Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1896
  2. Van Horn v. State ex rel. AbbottNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
  3. State ex rel. Norfolk Beet-Sugar Co. v. MooreNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Trumble v. TrumbleNebraska Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Wenham v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1902

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Beck v. City of YorkNebraska Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Power, Inc. v. HuntleyWashington Supreme Court · 1951
  3. United Community Services v. Omaha National BankNebraska Supreme Court · 1956
  4. State ex rel. Haberlan v. LoveNebraska Supreme Court · 1911
  5. State Ex Rel. Douglas v. ThoneNebraska Supreme Court · 1979

21 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