Olmstead v. Board of Supervisors

24 Iowa 33
Supreme Court of Iowa·Decided January 27, 1867·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Beck, J.

1. taxation : sharesf1 bank I. The assessment and levy of the tax is illegal, the shares of the bank not being taxable. Hubbard et al. v. Supervisors of Johnson County, 23 Iowa, 130.

2. — mandamus: injunction. II. Without deciding whether mandamus is a proper remedy for plaintiffs, we are agreed in holding that the petition prays for proper relief by injunction. i” , - r . - , Neither need we determine whether the joinder of the prayers for the remedies of mandamus and injunction, is warranted by our Code of Practice. It was not objected to by defendant, and such objection, had it been made and sustained, would not have operated to dismiss the proceeding, for the plaintiffs could have amended their petition, and abandoned their claim for one or the other of the remedies. Inasmuch, then, as injunction is a proper remedy, and is prayed for in the petition, we are of the opinion that the demurrer should not have been sustained.

Reversed.

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

Olmstead v. Board of Supervisors, 24 Iowa 33 (iowa 1867).

24 Iowa 33 (Olmstead v. Board of Supervisors) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Roddewig
24 F. Supp. 321 (S.D. Iowa, 1938)
Woodbine Savings Bank v. Tyler
181 Iowa 1389 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1917)
Brockman v. City of Creston
44 N.W. 822 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1890)
Rood v. Board of Supervisors
39 Iowa 444 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1874)