Irwin v. Wright
Citations
- 258 U.S. 219
- 42 S. Ct. 293
- 66 L. Ed. 573
- 1922 U.S. LEXIS 2262
Syllabus
<p>]. A suit to enjoin a public officer from enforcing a statute is personal .and, in the absence of statutory provision for continuing' it against his successor, abates upon his death. P. 222. '</p> <p>2. The Act of February 8, 1899, c. 121, 30 Stat. 822, does not authorize such revivor against state officers, nor does § 461 of the Arizona Civil Code.. P. 222.</p> <p>3. A suit against the members of a continuing public board, such as a board of county supervisors in Arizona, does not abate when members retire, and their successors may be substituted. P. 224.</p> <p>4. Injunctive relief against collection of taxes unlawfully assessed on lands in Arizona and against future assessments, may be obtained in a suit against the Board of Supervisors of the county, jn view of their functions under the Arizona law. P. 226.</p> <p>5. Lands entered. within a reclamation, project are not subject to state taxation before the equitable title has passed to the entryman; and that title does not pass until the conditions of reclamation and payment of water charges due at time of final proof, imposed by the amended Reclama! ion Act, have been fulfilled in addition to 1he requirements of the Homestead Act. P. 226. •</p> <p>6. The Act of June 23, 1910, which permits entrymen within reclamation projects'who have proved full compliance with the Homestead- Law to assign in whole or .in part.to other persons, subject 1o Ihe requirements of the Reclamation Act, was designed to enable entrymen, whose entries-were cut down to smaller farm units proscribed by the Secretary of the' Interior, to dispose of their ■ surplus to others who would pursue the requirements of the Reclamation Act., and did not operate to subject such entries to state taxation. P. 231.</p> <p>7. With- respect, to taxation, mining claims differ, from other claims to public lands, in that the mining interest,, with the right to appropriate the mineral, arises from discovery and location and is independent of patent. P. 231.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “[N]o state can tax the property of the United States.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Taft
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.