Crooke v. Board of Commissioners

Indiana Supreme Court

Crooke v. Board of Commissioners

36 Ind. 320

CourtIndiana Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 15, 1871

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 36 Ind. 320 (Crooke v. Board of Commissioners) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Crooke v. Board of Commissioners, 36 Ind. 320 (Ind. 1871).

Pincite

Opinion

Downey, J.

This was a complaint by Crooke against the appellees to enjoin them from levying a tax under the act of May 12th, 1869, authorizing counties and townships to aid in the construction of railroads, etc. The circuit court refused the injunction. We think it should have granted it. Section three of the act requires that the notice given to the voters, by the auditor,of the election, shall specify the amount to be appropriated. The notice in this instance was defec[321]*321tive in not giving this information. As this defect renders the election and all subsequent proceedings under it illegal, we will hot examine any of the other questions made.

T. R. Cobb, y. M Van Trees, and N F, Malott, for appel- ■ lant. y W. Burton, S. H Taylor, and y. H. O'Neall, for appellees.

■ The judgment is reversed, with costs, and the cause remanded.

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

Downey, J.

This was a complaint by Crooke against the appellees to enjoin them from levying a tax under the act of May 12th, 1869, authorizing counties and townships to aid in the construction of railroads, etc. The circuit court refused the injunction. We think it should have granted it. Section three of the act requires that the notice given to the voters, by the auditor,of the election, shall specify the amount to be appropriated. The notice in this instance was defec[321]*321tive in not giving this information. As this defect renders the election and all subsequent proceedings under it illegal, we will hot examine any of the other questions made.

T. R. Cobb, y. M Van Trees, and N F, Malott, for appel- ■ lant. y W. Burton, S. H Taylor, and y. H. O'Neall, for appellees.

■ The judgment is reversed, with costs, and the cause remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 Ind. 320, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crooke-v-board-of-commissioners-ind-1871.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack