Nesbit v. Riverside Independent District

Citations

• 144 U.S. 610
• 12 S. Ct. 746
• 36 L. Ed. 562
• 1892 U.S. LEXIS 2108

Syllabus

<p>When the constitution of a State forbids “ county, political or other municipal corporations” within the State to “ become indebted in any manner” beyond a named percentage “ on the value of the taxable property within such county or corporation,” negotiable .bonds issued by such corporation in excess of such limit are. invalid withoút regard to any recitals which they contain.</p> <p>A holder of such bonds for value, is bound to take notice of the amount of. the taxable property within the municipality at the date of their issue, as shown by the tax list, and is charged with knowledge of the over-issue.</p> <p>When a second suit is upon the same cause of' action, and between the same parties as a former suit, the judgment in the former is conclusive; ' in the-latter as to every question which .was or might have been presented and determined in the first action; but when the second suit is upon a different cause of action, though between the samé parties, the judgment in the former action operates as an éstoppel only as to the. point or. ques- . tion actually litigated and determined, and not as to other matters which might have been'litigated and determined.</p> <p>Each matured coupon upon a negotiable bond is a separable promise, distinct from the promises to pay the bond or the other coupons, and gives rise to a separate cause of aetiop.</p> <p>A judgment against.a municipal corporation in an action on coupons cut ' from its negotiable bonds, where the only defence set up was the invalidity of the issue of the bonds by reason of.their being in excess of the amount allowed by law, is no estoppel to another action between thp . same parties, on the bonds themselves and other coupons cut from them, where.the defence set up is such invalidity, coupled with knowledge of the same .by the plaintiff when he acquired the bonds and coupons.</p>