Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Klein

Nebraska Supreme Court

Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Klein

75 N.W. 42, 54 Neb. 781, 1898 Neb. LEXIS 166

CourtNebraska Supreme Court

DecidedMay 4, 1898

DocketNo. 9160

StatusPublished

This text of 75 N.W. 42 (Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Klein) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Klein, 75 N.W. 42, 54 Neb. 781, 1898 Neb. LEXIS 166 (Neb. 1898).

Pincite

Opinions

Harrison, C. J.

After the county of Gage had adopted and perfected township organization, in the regular course of affairs of the county and township governments, there were assessed by the county authorities on the property of the railway company certain taxes for county purposes, not in excess in the aggregate of fifteen mills on the dollar, or the maximum which they could assess. There had been for and in each of the townships in which there was situated property of the company an assessment, in the manner prescribed by law, of taxes on such property, not to exceed seven mills on the dollar of valuation, the limit provided by law. Aggregated, however, the township assessment and the county assessment exceeded fifteen mills on the doRar. The company denied the right of collection of the amount in excess of fifteen mills and instituted and prosecuted to a successful termination this action in the district court of said county [782]*782to restrain the county treasurer from the collection of such excess. The cause was by the treasurer appealed, to this court, and, as the result of a hearing, the decree of the district court was reversed and the cause dismissed. (See opinion reported in 52 Neb. 258.) A motion for a rehearing on the part of the company was sustained and there have been a reargument and a second submission. We have again carefully examined and considered the points in controversy and are satisfied that the determinations of them announced in the former decision have in their support the sounder reasons than have or can be urged in favor of the contrary ones which we have been asked to adopt, and that the conclusions of the opinion to which we have referred were correct and right. The subjects involved and presented were so thoroughly reviewed in the prior decision that we deem it wholly unnecessary to again discuss them here. We approve and adhere to the views there expressed. It follows that the decree of the lower court is reversed and the action dismissed.

Judgment accordingly.

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

Harrison, C. J.

After the county of Gage had adopted and perfected township organization, in the regular course of affairs of the county and township governments, there were assessed by the county authorities on the property of the railway company certain taxes for county purposes, not in excess in the aggregate of fifteen mills on the dollar, or the maximum which they could assess. There had been for and in each of the townships in which there was situated property of the company an assessment, in the manner prescribed by law, of taxes on such property, not to exceed seven mills on the dollar of valuation, the limit provided by law. Aggregated, however, the township assessment and the county assessment exceeded fifteen mills on the doRar. The company denied the right of collection of the amount in excess of fifteen mills and instituted and prosecuted to a successful termination this action in the district court of said county [782]*782to restrain the county treasurer from the collection of such excess. The cause was by the treasurer appealed, to this court, and, as the result of a hearing, the decree of the district court was reversed and the cause dismissed. (See opinion reported in 52 Neb. 258.) A motion for a rehearing on the part of the company was sustained and there have been a reargument and a second submission. We have again carefully examined and considered the points in controversy and are satisfied that the determinations of them announced in the former decision have in their support the sounder reasons than have or can be urged in favor of the contrary ones which we have been asked to adopt, and that the conclusions of the opinion to which we have referred were correct and right. The subjects involved and presented were so thoroughly reviewed in the prior decision that we deem it wholly unnecessary to again discuss them here. We approve and adhere to the views there expressed. It follows that the decree of the lower court is reversed and the action dismissed.

Judgment accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

75 N.W. 42, 54 Neb. 781, 1898 Neb. LEXIS 166, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chicago-burlington-quincy-railroad-v-klein-neb-1898.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack