Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

Internal revenue.

United States may recover internal revenue

taxes in action of debt, pp. 238-240.

Cited and principle applied in United States v. Snyder, 149 U. S. 215, 37 L. 707, 13 S. Ct. 848, holding lien imposed by revised statutes, section 3207, to secure payment of tobacco taxes, not subject to State recordation laws; United States v. Tilden, 9 Ben. 388, F. C. 16,519, suit in debt to recover income tax; United States v. Hal. loran, 14 Blatchf. 4, F. C. 15,286, holding capacity tax on distillery, recoverable in debt; Garrett v. Memphis, 5 Fed. 870, holding municipal taxes, duly levied, recoverable in equity, through receiver, for benefit of city's creditors; United States v. Cobb, 11 Fed. 79, holding right of government to customs duties, not limited to lien on goods; United States v. Bristow, 20 Fed. 379, and United States v. Pacific R. R., 4 Dill. 68, F. C. 15,983, both holding internal revenue taxes may be sued for in debt. Applied by analogy in Perry Co. v. Railroad Co., 58 Ala. 564, holding taxpayer's liability enforceable in common-law action; Winter v. City Council, 79 Ala. 488, holding liability for taxes enforceable in equity, where legal remedy is inadequate; Johnson v. Armour, 31 Fla. 428, 12 So. 845. holding tax payment enforceable in ordinary civil action, statute providing no remedy; Dubuque v. Illinois Central R. R., 39 Iowa, 74, holding debt maintainable to recover taxes, although statute provides special remedies; State v. Georgia Co., 112 N. C. 37, 17 S. E. 11, 19 L. R. A. 485, upholding right of State to sue in debt for taxes; State v. Baker Co., 24 Or. 145, 33 Pac. 531, holding law action lies against county for its proportion of State tax; State v. Duncan, 3 Lea, 688, holding State may avail itself of all remedies given individuals in like cases; State v. Hirsch, 16 Lea, 44, holding statutory method of tax collection not exclusive on State; Henrietta v. Eustis, 87 Tex. 17, 26 S. W. 620, holding city may sue at law for taxes due; dissenting opinion in People v. Biggins, 96 Ill. 489, majority denying chancery jurisdiction to enforce statutory tax lien. See 15 Am. Dec. 383, note, and 42 Am. St. Rep. 656, note.

Departed from in State v. Baltimore, etc., R. R., 41 W. Va. 87, 88, 23 S. E. 678, 679, holding no suit lies for taxes, where statute prescribes method of collection.

Internal revenue. No assessment is necessary to charge a bank with amount of taxes due, under act of 1870, levying 5 per cent. tax on all undistributed bank earnings, p. 241.

Cited and principle applied in King v. United States, 99 U. S. 233, 25 L. 375, holding revenue collector liable for tax collected, although no assessment had been made; United States v. Erie Ry.. 107 U. S. 2, 27 L. 385, 2 S. Ct. 84, holding amount of debt fixed by law providing tax; United States v. Philadelphia, etc., R. R., 12 U. S. 114, 31 L. 139, 8 S. Ct. 77, holding assessment not required by act; United States v. Tilden, 9 Ben. 380, 385, F. C. 16,519, hold

ANN

ing suit for income tax, maintainable without prior assessment; United States v. Halloran, 14 Blatchf. 3, 4, F. C. 15,286, holding assessment not condition precedent to collection of tax prescribed by statute; United States v. Chase, 25 Fed. Cas. 412, holding amount of tax a debt due government; United States v. Hazard, 26 Fed. Cas. 251, holding assessment of income tax not binding on government; United States v. Little Miami, etc., R. R., 1 Fed. 701, holding assessment and payment no bar to suit for recovery of amount due over assessed amount; Folsam v. United States, 21 Fed. 37, and United States v. Warrick, 25 Fed. 140, both holding assessment not a condition precedent to right to collect tax: Meads v. United States, 81 Fed. 688, 689, 54 U. S. App. 158, 159, holding land receiver liable on bond for money received from entrymen before due; Boody v. Watson, 64 N. H. 168, 188, 9 Atl. 799, 813, holding assessment not a prerequisite to creation of tax debt; Vermont, etc., R. R. v. Central Vermont R. R., 63 Vt. 22, 21 Atl. 267, 10 L. R. A. 565, holding assessment by law itself no impairment of taxpayer's rights. Cited generally in Bell's Gap R. R. v. Pennsylvania. 134 U. S. 239, 33 L. 896, 10 S. Ct. 536, holding method of assessing State tax on nominal values, not unconstitutional; American Bank v. Northwestern Ins. Co., 89 Fed. 617, 60 U. S. App. 705, and dissenting opinion in Meriwether v. Garrett, 102 U. S. 531, 26 L. 211, arguendo. Distinguished in United States v. Pacific R. R., 1 McCrary. 7. 1 Fed. 102, holding assessment return of delinquent taxes, necessary to attachment of lien, under revised statutes, section 3186; State v. Railroad Co., 54 S. C. 575, 32 S. E. 695, holding assessment essential to create liability for taxes.

Miscellaneous.- State v. Southwestern R. R., 70 Ga. 33. as to non-allowance of interest on judgment for taxes; Prince William School v. Stuart, 80 Va. 75, dissenting opinion.

19 Wall. 241-253, 22 L. 83, NUGENT v. SUPERVISORS.

Municipal corporations.- Manual subscription on company's books is not necessary to constitute county a subscriber to railroad's stock, resolution of supervisors and acceptance by railroad being sufficient, p. 248.

Relied on in County of Moultrie v. Savings Bank, 92 U. S. 635, 23 L. 633, a similar case; Town of East Lincoln v. Davenport, 94 U. S. 803, 24 L. 323, holding majority vote at town meeting amounted to subscription; Bates County v. Winters, 112 U. S. 327, 28 L. 745, 5 S. Ct. 158, holding vote of County Court, followed by acceptance of subscription by railroad, constituted county a subscriber; Nelson v. Haywood Co., 87 Tenn. 797, 11 S. W. 889, 4 L. R. A. 655, holding resolution to subscribe and present acceptance by railroad, binds county, irrespective of manual subscription. See extended note in 98 Am. Dec. 670, ou municipal bonds.

Distinguished in County of Bates v. Winters, 97 U. S. 89, 24 L. 934, overruled in S. C., 112 U. S. 327, 28 L. 745, 5 S. Ct. 158, hold

Ing order authorizing subscription, not self-executing; Butler University v. Scoonover, 114 Ind. 385, 5 Am. St. Rep. 630, 16 N. E. 644, where parties never mutually assented to contract of subscription; Board of Commrs. v. State, 115 Ind. 85, 17 N. E. 863, holding mere voting of aid to railroad, not a subscription; State v. Garroute. 67 Mo. 453, and Weil v. Greene Co., 69 Mo. 285, both holding no subscription, railroad not having accepted same.

Corporations. Subscriber to stock of railroad is released from obligations to pay subscription by fundamental alteration of charter, p. 248.

Cited and applied in Bank v. Charlotte, 85 N. C. 439, where charter was altered to greatly shorten railroad; Dow v. Northern R. R., 67 N. H. 26, 36 Atl. 523, holding ninety-nine-year lease to another road, invalid, as against dissenting stockholders; International, etc., R. R. v. Bremond, 53 Tex. 117, holding consolidation, changing objects of corporation, a wrong to stockholder of original company; Næsen v. Town of Port Washington, 37 Wis. 175, holding non-assenting subscribers released by change in direction in railroad.

Corporations.- Subscriber to railroad stock is not released from liability on his subscription by amalgamation of the company with another, as allowed by law, p. 253.

Relied on in Town of East Lincoln v. Davenport, 94 U. S. 806, 24 L. 324, a similar case; Buffalo v. Iron Co., 105 U. S. 76, 26 L. 1025, holding bonds voted in aid of company, rightly delivered to consolidated company; Livingston Co. v. Portsmouth Bank, 128 U. S. 122, 32 L. 366, 9 S. Ct. 25, holding privilege of receiving subscription passes to consolidated company; Thomas v. Scotland County, 3 Dill. 11, F. C. 13,909, Washburn v. Cass Co., 3 Dill. 260, 261, F. C. 17,213, Lewis v. Claredon, 5 Dill. 334, F. C. 8,320, Gray v. Town of York, 15 Blatchf. 339, F. C. 5,731, Pope v. Board of Commissioners, 51 Fed. 772, and Atchison, etc., R. R. v. Board of Commissioners, 25 Kan. 272, 273, all similar cases, holding subscriber not released by subsequent consolidation; Lowell v. Railroad Co., 90 Me. 94, 37 Atl. 874, holding change in location of road did not release subscribing county; Hale v. Cheshire R. R., 161 Mass. 445, 37 N. E. 307, holding dissenting stockholders cannot maintain claim for better terms for themselves, on consolidation, than voted by majority; Mower v. Staples, 32 Minn. 286, 20 N. W. 226, holding increase in number of directors not a fundamental alteration of charter; Armstrong v. Karshner, 47 Ohio St. 300, 24 N. E. 905, holding alteration in line of road did not release subscribers; Lynch v. Eastern, etc., R. R., 57 Wis. 466, 15 N. W. 758, holding subscribers not released by assignment of franchise to another company. Cited generally in Mount Vernon v. Hovey, 52 Ind. 567; arguendo, in Farmers' Loan Co. v. Toledo, etc., R. R., 54 Fed. 768,

6 U. S. App. 469. See extended note in 79 Am. Dec. 423, 424, 426. on consolidation of corporations, and 98 Am. Dec. 671, extended note on effect on bonds of consolidation.

Distinguished in County of Bates v. Winters, 97 U. S. 89, 24 L. 934, holding subscription to one company not authorized by vote for subscription to another; State v. Garroute, 67 Mo. 465, and Wagner v. Meety, 69 Mo. 151, both holding power to subscribe to original company perished with its consolidation. Also in note to

3 Dill. 162, F. C. 6,148, decided before principal case.

19 Wall. 254-263, 22 L. 64, KITCHEN v. RAYBURN.

Equity will not assist one to obtain benefit of contract obtained through his fraud, hence accounting of trust fund at suit of one. who by false representations in another part of same transaction had defrauded the trustee, was refused, p. 263.

Distinguished in Sturm v. Boker, 150 U. S. 334, 37 L. 1101, 14 S. Ct. 106, holding complainant not estopped by his statement of opinion on question of law.

19 Wall. 264-270, 22 L. 114, CALDWELL'S CASE.

Contracts.- Terms " posts, depots, or stations," in contract for transportation of military supplies in war time, held to refer to military posts, etc., not to railroad stations, p. 268.

Cited in Black v. United States, 91 U. S. 269, 23 L. 325, holding military post not specifically mentioned in like contract, within its purview.

66

Contract for transportation of military supplies to posts on west bank of river," does not include posts ninety miles west of river, p. 269.

19 Wall. 271-273, 22 L. 47, HALL v. JORDAN.

Internal revenue.- Act of 1864, providing that deeds be stamped in proportion to consideration money, requires same stamp, whether consideration be gold or in legal-tender notes, p. 273.

Courts. Where party alleges that stamp on deed was too small. it being his duty to furnish stamp, and by carrying question to Supreme Court delays judgment, 10 per cent. damages will be added to judgment below, p. 273.

Not cited.

19 Wall. 274-286, 22 L. 152, COIT v. ROBINSON.

Bankruptcy.- No appeal lies to Supreme Court from Circuit Court decree. rendered in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction conferred by first clause, second section, bankruptcy act of 1867. p. 295

Followed in Stickney v. Welt, 23 Wall. 160, 23 L. 53, Sandusky v. National Bank, 23 Wall. 293, 23 L. 156, and Wiswall v. Campbell, 93 U. S. 348, 351, 23 L. 923, 924. Applied in Kempton v. Saunders, 132 Mass. 468 denying State Supreme Court's jurisdiction over appeal from State Insolvency Court; dissenting opinion in Cleveland Ins. Co. v. Globe Ins. Co., 98 U. S. 380, 25 L. 205, majority applying rule.

Bankruptcy. Supervisory jurisdiction of Circuit Courts in bankruptcy proceedings, distinguished from general appellate jurisdiction, pp. 281-286.

Cited in In re Starr, 56 Fed. 143, and In re Briggs, 61 Fed. 499, 20 U. S. App. 579, both holding supervisory jurisdiction not transferred to Circuit Courts of Appeal along with appellate jurisdiction by act of 1891.

Miscellaneous.- Cited incidentally in Duff v. Carrier, 55 Fed. 434, 8 U. S. App. 552, and Du Vivier v. Hopkins, 116 Mass. 128, 17 Am. Rep. 144.

19 Wall. 287-419, 22 L. 125, MITCHELL v. TILGHMAN.

Patent, introduced in evidence by complainant in infringement sult, affords prima facie presumption that patentee is first and original inventor of what is therein described, p. 390.

Cited and applied in Page Wire-Fence Co. v. Land, 49 Fed. 937, holding introduction of subsequent patent to alleged infringer does not overcome presumption; Hunt, etc., Co. v. Cassidy, 53 Fed. 259, 7 U. S. App. 424, holding burden on defendant of showing patentee not first inventor; Chase v. Tillebrown, 58 Fed. 376, holding patent prima facie evidence as to every point touching its validity.

Patents. Claim for manufacturing article by certain process must be construed as limiting same to the process as described, whether or not specifications are referred to in claim, p. 391.

Cited and principle applied in Henderson v. Cleveland Stove Co., 11 Fed. Cas. 1081, construing claim for result to be claim for mechanism described in specifications; Westinghouse v. Gardner Brake Co., 29 Fea. Cas. 799, holding words "substantially as described," necessarily implied in construing claims; New Process Co. v. Maus, 20 Fed. 728, holding not result, but means by which result is effected, patentable; Zau v. M'Kenzie, 62 Fed. 286, holding claim broader than description of invention, must be so interpreted as to limit it to improvement described; Adams Ry. Co. v. Lindell Ry. Co., 77 Fed. 449, 40 U. S. App. 482, holding general language in claim limited to element or device described in specifications; Brill v. St. Louis Car Co., 90 Fed. 669, 62 U. S. App. 282, holding general language of claim limited by description in specification; Burke v. Partridge, 58 N. H. 351, as to construction of patents. Cited with out application in Wilkins Shoe, etc., Co. v. Webb, 89 Fed. 983.

ANN

« ForrigeFortsett »