Case ID: okla_185/html/0330-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "WELCH, V. C. J. GIBSON, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

KAY COUNTY, EXCISE BOARD v. KURN et al.
    No. 29058.
    June 27, 1939.
    
      J. H. Hill, County Attorney, and It. O. Wilson, Attorney for Board of Education, for plaintiff in error.
    Cruce, Satterfield & Grigsby, for defendants in error.
   WELCH, V. C. J.

This appeal involves protest of the same item of appropriation, on the same ground, as that iuvovled in cause No. 29057, Kay County, Excise Board, v. Atchison. T. & S. F. Ry. Co., this day decided, 185 Okla. 327, 91 P.2d 1087. Upon that authority the judgment of the Court of Tax Review is reversed, and the protest is denied.

BAYLESS, C. J., and CORN, DAVISON, and DANNER, JJ., concur. RILEY, OSBORN, GIBSON, and HURST, JJ., dissent.

GIBSON, J.

(dissenting). I dissent to the majority opinion for the reasons staled in my dissenting opinion this day filed in the companion case, No. 29057, Kay County, Excise Board v. Atchison. Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company, 185 Okla. 327, 91 P.2d 1087.

I am authorized to say that Justices RILEY. OSBORN, and HURST concur in this dissenting view.