Boise City v. Boise Artesian Hot & Cold Water Co.

Good Law
125 C.C.A. 548·208 F. 546·1913 U.S. App. LEXIS 1721
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 23, 1913No. 1,875California512 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Ross, J.

The plaintiff in error was plaintiff in the court below in an action against the defendant in error, a municipal corporation of the state of Idaho, to recover certain license fees imposed by an ordinance of the city adopted June 7, 1906, for the privilege granted by a prior ordinance to the predecessors in interest of the plaintiff in error to lay and maintain water pipes in the streets and alleys of the city for the furnishing of water to the inhabitants thereof. This court sustained the validity of the ordinance imposing the license fees by its judgment rendered and entered here February 6, 1911. 186 Fed. 705 , 108 C. C. A. 523 . The mandate was duly stayed, and during such stay a petition for a writ of error from the Supreme Court to review the judgment of this court was allowed May 4, 1911, being a day of the same term of the court, and a supersedeas bond was duly approved and filed.

• In February, 1912, in an action in the District Court of the United States for the District of Idaho, the constitutionality of the same ordinance of Boise City in respect to the imposition of license fees was made an issue, and the District Court, following the aforesaid decision of this court,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.