City of Douglas v. Kitchel

Arizona Supreme Court

City of Douglas v. Kitchel

36 P.2d 564, 44 Ariz. 246, 1934 Ariz. LEXIS 177

CourtArizona Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 4, 1934

DocketCivil No. 3384.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 36 P.2d 564 (City of Douglas v. Kitchel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Arizona Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of Douglas v. Kitchel, 36 P.2d 564, 44 Ariz. 246, 1934 Ariz. LEXIS 177 (Ark. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

This is an action by the city of Douglas, hereinafter called plaintiff, against Dan S. Kitchel, as county treasurer, and county of Cochise, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called defendants, to recover certain moneys which it is alleged defendant Kitchel, in his capacity as treasurer of Cochise county, holds in trust for plaintiff. The essential facts and the legal questions raised by the appeal in this case are so similar to those in the case *Page 247 of City of Bisbee v. Cochise County et al., ante, p. 233,36 P.2d 559, just decided, that we think it unnecessary to state them. For the reasons set forth in the case just cited, the judgment of the superior court of Cochise county is affirmed as to the county of Cochise and reversed as to Dan S. Kitchel, as county treasurer, and remanded with instructions to overrule the demurrer to the complaint so far as he is concerned, and for such further proceedings as may be proper.

ROSS, C.J., and McALISTER, J., concur.

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

This is an action by the city of Douglas, hereinafter called plaintiff, against Dan S. Kitchel, as county treasurer, and county of Cochise, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called defendants, to recover certain moneys which it is alleged defendant Kitchel, in his capacity as treasurer of Cochise county, holds in trust for plaintiff. The essential facts and the legal questions raised by the appeal in this case are so similar to those in the case *Page 247 of City of Bisbee v. Cochise County et al., ante, p. 233,36 P.2d 559, just decided, that we think it unnecessary to state them. For the reasons set forth in the case just cited, the judgment of the superior court of Cochise county is affirmed as to the county of Cochise and reversed as to Dan S. Kitchel, as county treasurer, and remanded with instructions to overrule the demurrer to the complaint so far as he is concerned, and for such further proceedings as may be proper.

ROSS, C.J., and McALISTER, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 P.2d 564, 44 Ariz. 246, 1934 Ariz. LEXIS 177, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-douglas-v-kitchel-ariz-1934.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack