Booth v. Clark

Idaho Supreme Court

Booth v. Clark

222 P. 779, 38 Idaho 376, 1923 Ida. LEXIS 91

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Booth v. Clark. Read the opinion of the Court — 42 Idaho 284 →

Idaho Supreme Court·Decided December 6, 1923·Published

Opinion

BUDGE, C. J.

— This is an original application for writ of mandamus directed to defendant, as county treasurer and ex-officio tax collector of Ada county, Idaho', directing her to accept delinquent taxes and interest thereon and to issue to plaintiff proper receipts and a tax deed therefor. The facts and questions of law are substantially the same as those presented to this court in the case of Washington County v. Paradis, ante, p. 364, 222 Pac. 775. Upon the authority of that ease it is ordered that the writ issue. Costs are awarded to plaintiff.

McCarthy, Dunn, William A. Lee and Wm. E. Lee, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BUDGE, C. J.

— This is an original application for writ of mandamus directed to defendant, as county treasurer and ex-officio tax collector of Ada county, Idaho', directing her to accept delinquent taxes and interest thereon and to issue to plaintiff proper receipts and a tax deed therefor. The facts and questions of law are substantially the same as those presented to this court in the case of Washington County v. Paradis, ante, p. 364, 222 Pac. 775. Upon the authority of that ease it is ordered that the writ issue. Costs are awarded to plaintiff.

McCarthy, Dunn, William A. Lee and Wm. E. Lee, JJ., concur.

Booth v. Clark, 222 P. 779, 38 Idaho 376, 1923 Ida. LEXIS 91 (Idaho 1923).

Pincite

222 P. 779 (Booth v. Clark) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related