Allan Richardson v. Fajardo Sugar Company
| Decision Date | 17 April 1916 |
| Docket Number | No. 280,280 |
| Parties | ALLAN H. RICHARDSON, as Treasurer of Porto Rico, Plff. in Err., v. FAJARDO SUGAR COMPANY |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. Samuel T. Ansell, Howard L. Kern, and Lewis W. Call for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 44-46 intentionally omitted] Messrs. Lorenzo D. Armstrong and Joseph W. Murphy for defendant in error.
Taxes for the fiscal year 1911-1912, amounting to $7,038, were assessed against defendant in error on account of certain personal property, and were paid under protest. Purporting to proceed under act No. 35, Laws of Porto Rico, 1911 (copied in margin), and claiming the assess- ment was wholly illegal, the Sugar Company brought this suit to recover the sum so paid. In due season the treasurer of Porto Rico, appearing by its attorney general, made full answer to the original complaint; a day for trial was fixed by stipulation; an amended and also a supplemental complaint were filed and appropriately answered. Eight months after institution of the action the court's jurisdiction was first challenged by motion to dismiss, and thereafter the point was persistently urged. The company recovered judgment for amount claimed (6 Porto Rico Fed. Rep. 224); and the cause has been argued here by counsel.
It is not now seriously maintained that the tax was lawfully demanded—in effect, the contrary is conceded.
A reversal of the district court's action is asked upon the theory that the proceeding is against Porto Rico, a government of sovereign attributes, which has only consented to be sued in its own courts. Porto Rico v. Rosaly y Castillo, 227 U. S. 270, 57 L. ed. 507, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 352. Whatever might have been the merit of this position if promptly asserted and adhered to, we hold, following the principles announced in Porto Rico v. Ramos, 232 U. S. 627, 58 L. ed. 763, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 461, that having solemnly appeared and taken the other steps above narrated, plaintiff in error could not thereafter deny the court's jurisdiction. Gunter v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. 200 U. S. 273, 284, 50 L. ed. 477, 483, 26 Sup. Ct. Rep. 252. The judgment is affirmed.
Section 1. That in all cases in which an officer charged by law with the collection of revenue due the government of Porto Rico, shall institute any proceeding or take any steps for the collection of the same, alleged or claimed by such officer to be due from any person, the party against whom the proceeding or step is taken shall, if he conceives the same to be unjust or illegal, or against any statute, pay the same under protest.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Campa, No. 01-17176.
...he first raised the defense that we conclude as a matter of law that he waived any defense, see Richardson v. Fajardo Sugar Co., 241 U.S. 44, 46-47, 36 S.Ct. 476, 477, 60 L.Ed. 879 (1916) (holding that a defendant who appeared, filed answers to an original and several amended complaints, se......
-
Great Northern Life Ins Co v. Read
...our conclusions. Cf. Farish v. State Banking Board, 235 U.S. 498, 512, 35 S.Ct. 185, 189, 59 L.Ed. 330; Richardson v. Fajardo Sugar Co., 241 U.S. 44, 47, 36 S.Ct. 476, 477, 60 L.Ed. 879; State of Missouri v. Fiske, 290 U.S. 18, 24, 54 S.Ct. 18, 20, 78 L.Ed. It may be well to add that the co......
-
Flota Maritima Browning de Cuba v. Motor Vessel Ciudad
...assert her claim to the disputed property by escheat. Similarly, the Supreme Court held in Richardson, as Treasurer of Porto Rico v. Fajardo Sugar Company, 241 U.S. 44, 36 S.Ct. 476, 60 L.Ed. 879, that Porto Rico waived her immunity when she answered the complaints filed against her Treasur......
-
United States v. Bahel
...fully in the criminal proceedings without raising the issue of immunity until after the trial. See Richardson v. Fajardo Sugar Co., 241 U.S. 44, 46–47, 36 S.Ct. 476, 60 L.Ed. 879 (1916) (holding that a defendant who appeared, filed answers to an original and several amended complaints, set ......