Legal Opinion
Schoenhoeft v. Board of County Commissioners
Supreme Court of Kansas
Decided December 7, 1907No. 15,256PublishedCited by 10 opinions
Error from Kearny district court; William Easton Hutchison, judge.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Burch, J.:
The plaintiff sued for the interest due upon certain municipal bonds represented by interest coupons, one of which, typical of the others, reads as follows:
“No. 25. July 1, 1899,
“The township of Lakin, Finney county, state of Kansas, will pay to bearer, at the fiscal agency of the state of Kansas, in the city of New York, seven dollars and fifty cents, being six months’ interest on funding bond No. 1 for $250. .
Attest: A. B. Boylan, trustee.
F. C. Kennedy, ip. clerk.”
The date stated is that of the maturity of the coupon. Proper allegations…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Lincoln County v. LuningSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Freehill v. ChamberlainCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Sawyer v. ColganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Hubbell v. City of South HutchinsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1902
- School District No. 5 v. First National BankSupreme Court of Kansas · 1901
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- State ex rel. Boynton v. State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of Kansas · 1934
- Irvine v. BossenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Board of Education of Duncan v. JohnstonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1941
- Little v. Emmett Irrigation DistrictIdaho Supreme Court · 1928
- City of Harper v. DanielsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1914
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.