Union Pacific Railroad v. Board of County Commissioners
Citations
- 247 U.S. 282
- 38 S. Ct. 510
- 62 L. Ed. 1110
- 1918 U.S. LEXIS 1908
Syllabus
<p>An appeal does not lie to this court from an order of the Circuit Court of Appeals which merely affirms, on interlocutory appeal, an order of the District Court refusing a preliminary injunction, even where the decisions below were rested on the ground of adequate legal remedy, which might have been made the basis for a final dismissal of the bill. '</p> <p>A certiorari may issue under Jud. Code, § 262, to review an interlocutory. judgment of the Circuit Court of Appeals which, because the case is of a kind ultimately appealable, is not subject to certiorari under § 240.</p> <p>Decision of an application for certiorari having been postponed to the hearing of the appeal which was also taken, and the appeal being found without jurisdiction,-the certiorari, in this case, is granted and the record on appeal is treated as the return to the writ.</p> <p>Equity has.jurisdiction to enjoin the collection of illegally discriminatory taxes, where the existence of an. adequate and complete remedy at law is doubtful.</p> <p>Where the legal remedy by paying the taxes and suing to recover back necessitates separate actions against several school districts and towns, it will not displace the equitable remedy by injunction in one suit.</p> <p>Section 5750, Colorado Rev. Stats., 1908, provided a plain, adequate and complete legal remedy in cases of illegal taxes by requiring the Board of County Commissioners to refund them when paid and by conferring impliedly on the taxpayer a right to recover them though levied for state, school district and town, as well as for county, purposes by one action against the Board; but, in view of later provisions of Laws, 1913, c. 134, § 5, the effect of which has not been determined by the state supreme court and which might be construed as prohibiting the Board from refunding without the approval of the State Tax Commission and as withdrawing the right of action against the Board where the Commission disapproves, held, that the existence of an ad
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- reversing lower court’s refusal to grant injunction against collection of an allegedly illegal tax where the existence of an adequate remedy, by action at law for a refund of taxes, afterpayment, is “debatable or uncertain”
- collecting cases for the proposition that if state revenue laws provided a “plain, adequate and complete remedy at law’ to refund tax payments, “relief by injunction [wa]s not admissible”
- reversing lower court's refusal to grant injunction against collection of an allegedly illegal tax where the existence of an adequate remedy, by action at law for a refund of taxes, after payment, is \debatable or uncertain\
- “Our holdings on questions of state law do not bind state courts”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Van Devanter
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.