Penn Mutual Life Insurance v. Austin

Citations

• 168 U.S. 685
• 18 S. Ct. 223
• 42 L. Ed. 626
• 1898 U.S. LEXIS 1358

Syllabus

<p>The complainants in their bill predicated their right to relief upon the averment that certain ordinances adopted by the municipal authorities of Austin, and an act of the legislature of Texas referred to in their bill impaired the obligations of a contract which the bill alleged had been entered into with the complainants by the city of Austin, and that both the law of the State and the city ordinances were in contravention of the Constitution of the United States.' Held, that these allegations plainly brought the case within the provision in the act of March 3, 1891, c. 517, 26 Stat. 826, conferring upon this court jurisdiction to review by direct appeal any final judgment rendered by a Circuit Court in any case in which the constitution or a \\aw of a State is claimed to be in contraven- • tion of the Constitution of the United States.</p> <p>The reason upon which the rule that the mere assertion of a claim, unaccompanied by any act to give effect to the asserted right, cannot avail to keep alive a right which would otherwise be precluded because of laches, is based not alone upon the lapse- of time during which the neglect to enforce the right has existed, but upon the change of condition which may have arisen during the period in which there has been neglect' and when a court of equity finds that the position of the parties has so changed that equitable relief cannot be afforded without d.oing injustice, or that the intervening rights of third persons may be destroyed or seriously impaired, it will not exert its equitable powers in order to save one from the consequences of his own neglect.</p> <p>. The facts in this case bring it within that rule.</p>