Citation network
County of Cass Vs. Johnston
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 01, 1877
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 360 (1877) U.S. Supreme Court County of Cass v. JohnstonSearch
-
U.S. 360 (1877) County of Cass v. JohnstonSearch
-
such county, city, or town, at a regular or special election to be held therein, shall assent thereto. 2. Harshman v. BatesSearch
-
In Harshman v. BatesSearch
-
a single instance expressed a doubt as to its validity. The first Page 95 U. S. 366 case was that of State v. LinnSearch
-
the court held that they were the bonds of the township, and granted the writ. Following this are the cases of Ranney v. BaederSearch
-
McPike v. PenSearch
-
State v. CunninghamSearch
-
Rubey v. ShainSearch
-
State v. BatesSearch
-
State v. ClarksonSearch
-
State v. DaviessSearch
-
and State v. CooperSearch
-
to such a position had been given to language similar to that employed in the constitutional prohibition. In State v. WinkelmeierSearch
-
had been obtained. But however this may be, in 1866 a similar question was presented to the same court in State v. MayorSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
The writ of mandamus was accordingly issued. The same year the question came up again in State v. BinderSearch
-
id. 450. In that case, the point arose under the Refreshment Act of St. Louis, which was considered in State v. WinkelmeierSearch
-
Page 95 U. S. 368 were in favor of the grant and two thousand and thirty-four against it. The cases of State v. WinkelmeierSearch
-
as we are advised there has been no disposition since on the part of the courts of the state to modify them. In State v. SutterfieldSearch
-
to interfere with its previous adjudications when property has been acquired or money invested under them. Smith v. ClarkSearch
-
State v. SutterfieldSearch
-
supra. In St. Joseph Township v. RogersSearch
-
Among other authorities cited in support of this proposition is the case of State v. MayorSearch
-
to be adopted, unless the legislative will to that effect is clearly expressed. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. CountySearch
-
Taylor v. TaylorSearch
-
People v. WarfieldSearch
-
People v. GarnerSearch
-
People v. WiantSearch
-
id. 263. We conclude, therefore, that the Supreme Court of Missouri, when it decided the case of State v. LinnSearch
-
rule of state statutory and constitutional construction, is binding upon us. It follows that our decision in Harshman v. BatesSearch
-
the railroad company to which the subscription was voted was not incorporated until the day of the election, and Rubey v. ShainSearch
-
with the provisions of the law under which the bonds were issued. The reasoning of the learned circuit judge in Jordan v. CassSearch
-
with whom concurred MR. JUSTICE MILLER, dissenting. I feel obliged to adhere to the opinion given in Harshman v. BatesSearch
-
the settled law of the state, we should be governed by it. But I do not understand that this has been done. In State v. WinkelmeierSearch
-
qualified voters of the county, at a general election, shall vote in favor of such removal. This was the case of State v. SutterfieldSearch
-
distinguishable therefrom in several particulars, which it is unnecessary now to examine. The leading case of State v. LinnSearch
-
County, 44 id. 504, was cursorily examined in Harshman v. BatesSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court County of Cass v. JohnstonSearch
-
Harshman v. BatesSearch
-
of State v. LinnSearch
-
of Ranney v. BaederSearch
-
In State v. WinkelmeierSearch
-
State v. MayorSearch
-
State v. BinderSearch
-
State v. WinkelmeierSearch
-
of State v. WinkelmeierSearch
-
In State v. SutterfieldSearch
-
Smith v. ClarkSearch
-
In St. Joseph Township v. RogersSearch
-
of State v. MayorSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial