State ex rel. Ives v. Board of Commissioners

54 Kan. 372
CourtSupreme Court of Kansas
DecidedJuly 15, 1894
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 54 Kan. 372 (State ex rel. Ives v. Board of Commissioners) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State ex rel. Ives v. Board of Commissioners, 54 Kan. 372 (kan 1894).

Opinion

On Tuesday, the 7th day of March, 1893, before the supreme court of the state of Kansas, in session at the supreme court room, in the city of Topeka, the following proceeding was had, and remains of record at page 11 of journal “V” of said court:

“The State of Kansas, on the relation of J. N. Ives, attorney general, Plaintiff, v. “Thomas Rowe, J. E. Dawson, and Julius Johann, board of county commissioners, E. Rall, county treasurer, S. L. Altens, county clerk, L. W. Fulton, district clerk, James Phelps, sheriff, G. W. Hovey, county attorney, A. T. Irvin, register of deeds, J. V. Killion, probate judge, M. L. Ramsel, superintendent of schools, D. H. Mandigo, coroner, and Thomas Morris, surveyor, of Garfield county, Kansas, Defendants.
“And now, on this 7th day of March, 1893, this cause came regularly on for hearing, the plaintiff being represented [374]*374by John T. Idttle, attorney general, .8. D. Scott, and J. W. Par-leer, its attorneys; the defendants Thomas Rowe, J. E. Dawson, Julias Johann, E. Rail, S. L. Aliens, L. W. Pulton, James Phelps, G. W. Hovey, A. T. Irvin, J. V. Killion, M. L. Ramsel, D. H. Mandigo, and Thomas Morris, by Milton Brown, their attorney; and the defendants George L. Jones, executor of the estate of Joseph A. Jones, deceased, the Wayne County Savings Bank, of Detroit, Mich., H. P. Sinclair, and Benjamin Wissler, intervening bondholders, by Possington, Smith & Dallas, their attorneys.
“Said cause was heard upon the motion of plaintiff for judgment according to the stipulation heretofore filed herein, and the report of G. W. Potter, surveyor, heretofore appointed by this court, also filed herein. And the court finds that Garfield county at all times has contained, and now contains, less than 432 square miles, and that the section of the statute of Kansas creating said county, being § 6, chapter 81, Laws of 1887, approved March 23, 1887, is unconstitutional and void.
“It is, therefore, considered, adjudged, and decreed, that said county of Garfield be and is hereby dissolved, and adjudged to be an unconstitutional and void organization.
“It is further ordered, adjudged and decreed by the court, that the application of intervening creditors for the appointment of a commission to assess, levy and collect taxes from the inhabitants within said territory be denied, but that nothing herein be taken or held to be an adjudication or determination of any of the rights, legal or equitable, of the said parties intervening, by Rossington, Smith & Dallas, as their attorneys, or of any creditors of the said Garfield county, as heretofore constituted.
“It is further ordered, that the defendants Thomas Rowe, et al., pay the costs of this action, taxed at $ — , and that execution issue therefor.”

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

Related

Harris v. Shanahan
387 P.2d 771 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1963)
State ex rel. Morgan v. City of Newton
23 P.2d 463 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1933)
Baxter Telephone Co. v. Cherokee County Mutual Telephone Ass'n
146 P. 324 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1915)
Davidson v. Chalfant
116 P. 820 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1911)
Van Auken v. Garfield Township
72 P. 211 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1903)
Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. Preston
66 P. 1050 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1901)
Garfield Township v. Crocker
65 P. 273 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1901)
Garfield Township v. Finnup
61 P. 812 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 1899)
Riley v. Township of Garfield
49 P. 85 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1897)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
54 Kan. 372, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-ives-v-board-of-commissioners-kan-1894.