Chicago St Co v. Risty 21 23, 1928, No. 501

CourtUnited States Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtSTONE
Citation72 L.Ed. 703,48 S.Ct. 396,276 U.S. 567
PartiesCHICAGO, M., ST. P. & P. R. CO. v. RISTY et al. Argued Feb. 21-23, 1928
Docket NumberNo. 501
Decision Date09 April 1928

276 U.S. 567
48 S.Ct. 396
72 L.Ed. 703
CHICAGO, M., ST. P. & P. R. CO.

v.

RISTY et al.

No. 501.
Argued Feb. 21-23, 1928.
Decided April 9, 1928.

Messrs. H. E. Judge and T. M. Bailey, both of Sioux Falls, S. C., and

Page 568

Richard L. Kennedy, of St. Paul, Minn., for appellants.

Messrs. N. B. Bartlett and E. O. Jones, both of Sioux Falls, S. D., for appellees.

Mr. Justice STONE delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a suit brought by appellants, receivers of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company, in the District Court for South Dakota against the appellees, county commissioners of Minnehaha county, to enjoin the apportionment and assessment of benefits upon appellants' land for the maintenance of a drainage system, under the state agricultural drainage statutes (S. D. Laws 1907, c. 134, re-enacted as S. D. Rev. Code 1919, §§ 8458-8491, as amended by S. D. Laws 1920 (2d Sp. Sess.), c. 46), on the ground that the statutes and the proceedings has under them are in conflict with the Fourteenth Amendment of the Federal Constitution. From an order of the District Court, three judges sitting, denying an application for an interlocutory injunction, the case comes here on direct appeal. Jud. Code, §§ 238, 266 (11 USCA §§ 345, 380); Smith v. Wilson, 273 U. S. 388, 47 S. Ct. 385, 71 L. Ed. 699.

One phase of the controversy now presented and the statutes involved were before this court in Risty v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry., 270 U. S. 378, 46 S. Ct. 236, 70 L. Ed. 641. In that case it appeared that the railroad company, which is represented by the appellants here, owned lands in Minnehaha county, some of which had not been included within an established drainage district known as 'ditch No. 1 and ditch No. 2.' Those ditches having been seriously damaged by floods, a proceeding had been begun before the county commissioners for the enlargement and reconstruction of the system, now described as 'drainage district No. 1 and 2,' with the object of assessing the benefits and cost of the work on lands of the railroad

Page 569

company and others lying both within and without the original drainage district.

The suit was begun by the railroad company in the District Court for South Dakota to enjoin the county officers from making any apportionment and assessment of benefits affecting the property of the railroad company, on the ground that the drainage statutes of South Dakota and the proceedings under them violated the Fourteenth Amendment of the Federal Constitution. The District Court held that the statutes were valid and constitutional, but that the assessments for reconstruction and maintenance of the existing drainage system, so far as applied to lands outside the original drainage district, were unauthorized by the state statutes. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry. v. Risty (D. C.) 282 F. 364. No appeal was taken by the railroad company from the decree of the District Court, but on appeal by the county officials so much of the decree as involved the construction of the drainage statutes and their application to lands outside of the original drainage district was affirmed by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (297 F. 710), and by this court in Risty v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry., supra.

Following the decision in this Court, the appellants began the present suit, in which they raised anew the questions as to the constitutionality of the South Dakota drainage statutes, and sought relief the effect of which, if granted, would be to enjoin those assessments on the land of plaintiffs within the original drainage district which had been left undisturbed by the decree in the earlier litigation.

Appellees, on the present application for an interlocutory injunction, have set up that decree as res judicata as to all questions presented here. But an examination of the decree of the District Court in the earlier litigation, set out in the present record, discloses that by its terms

Page 570

the decree was 'without prejudice to any and all rights of the plaintiff to contest any such apportionment of benefits, or any assessment which may be made' affecting the land of appellants within the original drainage district and saving the right of the railroad company in this regard as though 'this suit had not been instituted or this decree entered.' Although reliance is placed upon this decree as res judicata, neither the record nor the briefs disclose the reason for the insertion of these provisions, and no reason is suggested why its language is not to be taken at its face value as saving to appellants the right to litigate anew the questions now presented.

Since our decision in Risty v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry., supra, the Supreme Court of South Dakota in State v. Risty (S. D.) 213 N. W. 952, has had occasion to pass upon the construction and the constitutionality of the South Dakota drainage statutes. Taking a different view from that of this court and the lower courts in Risty v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry., supra, it held that the proceedings involved in that litigation and in this, for the assessment of benefits upon lands both within and without the original drainage district, were authorized by the statutes of South Dakota. It held that the action taken for reconstruction of the old drainage ditches was not a proceeding for maintenance or repair of the old system, but a new and independent proceeding, and that the statutes authorized the establishment of a new drainage district embracing all the lands benefited, whether included in the old district or not. It also construed the sections regulating the proceedings for assessing the benefits and costs of the reconstruction and enlargement of the drainage ditches and, as construed,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
47 practice notes
  • United States v. Consolidated Mines & Smelting Co., Ltd., No. 25164
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • December 12, 1971
    ...Commerce and Labor. The rule laid down in Sing Tuck has been consistently followed. See, e. g., Chicago M., St. P. & P. R. Co. v. Risty, 276 U.S. 567, 48 S.Ct. 396, 72 L.Ed. 703 (1928); First National Bank of Greeley v. Board of Commissioners of Weld County, 264 U.S. 450, 44 S.Ct. 385, 68 L......
  • City of Winter Haven v. A. M. Klemm & Son
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • April 5, 1938
    ...required by the State Constitution, is a matter for State, and not for federal, jurisdiction. See Chicago, M. St. P. & P. R. Co. v. Risty, 276 U.S. 567, 48 S.Ct. 396, 72 L.Ed. 703; Forsyth v. Hammond, 166 U.S. 506, 17 S.Ct. 665, 41 L.Ed. 1095. In the North Miami Case, Ocean Beach Heights, e......
  • Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation Same v. Kenzie, Nos. 181
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • January 31, 1938
    ...v. St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co., 274 U.S. 588, 592, 593, 47 S.Ct. 720, 722, 71 L.Ed. 1219; Chicago, M., St. P. & P.R.R. Co. v. Risty, 276 U.S. 567, 575, 48 S.Ct. 396, 399, 72 L.Ed. 703; St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co. v. Alabama Public Service Commission, 279 U.S. 560, 563, 49 S.Ct. 383,......
  • Scott v. Scott
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • April 25, 1947
    ...before the imposition of the assessment as a charge upon the [158 Fla. 788] land (Chicago, M., St. P. & P. Ry. Co. v. Risty, 126 U.S. 567, 48 S.Ct. 396, 72 L.Ed. 703; Londoner v. City & County of Denver, 210 U.S. 373, 378, 28 S.Ct. 708, 52 L.Ed. 1103; Goodrich v. [City of] Detroit, 184 U.S.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
47 cases
  • United States v. Consolidated Mines & Smelting Co., Ltd., No. 25164
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • December 12, 1971
    ...Commerce and Labor. The rule laid down in Sing Tuck has been consistently followed. See, e. g., Chicago M., St. P. & P. R. Co. v. Risty, 276 U.S. 567, 48 S.Ct. 396, 72 L.Ed. 703 (1928); First National Bank of Greeley v. Board of Commissioners of Weld County, 264 U.S. 450, 44 S.Ct. 385, 68 L......
  • City of Winter Haven v. A. M. Klemm & Son
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • April 5, 1938
    ...required by the State Constitution, is a matter for State, and not for federal, jurisdiction. See Chicago, M. St. P. & P. R. Co. v. Risty, 276 U.S. 567, 48 S.Ct. 396, 72 L.Ed. 703; Forsyth v. Hammond, 166 U.S. 506, 17 S.Ct. 665, 41 L.Ed. 1095. In the North Miami Case, Ocean Beach Heights, e......
  • Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corporation Same v. Kenzie, Nos. 181
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • January 31, 1938
    ...v. St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co., 274 U.S. 588, 592, 593, 47 S.Ct. 720, 722, 71 L.Ed. 1219; Chicago, M., St. P. & P.R.R. Co. v. Risty, 276 U.S. 567, 575, 48 S.Ct. 396, 399, 72 L.Ed. 703; St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co. v. Alabama Public Service Commission, 279 U.S. 560, 563, 49 S.Ct. 383,......
  • Scott v. Scott
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • April 25, 1947
    ...before the imposition of the assessment as a charge upon the [158 Fla. 788] land (Chicago, M., St. P. & P. Ry. Co. v. Risty, 126 U.S. 567, 48 S.Ct. 396, 72 L.Ed. 703; Londoner v. City & County of Denver, 210 U.S. 373, 378, 28 S.Ct. 708, 52 L.Ed. 1103; Goodrich v. [City of] Detroit, 184 U.S.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT