City of East St Louis v. United States Zebley
Decision Date | 04 February 1884 |
Citation | 28 L.Ed. 162,4 S.Ct. 21,110 U.S. 321 |
Parties | CITY OF EAST ST. LOUIS and another v. UNITED STATES ex rel ZEBLEY |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
J. W. Freels and B. H. Canby, for plaintiffs in error.
T. C. Mather, for defendants in error.
The relator having recovered judgments in the circuit court of the United States for the Southern district of Illinois upon bonds issued by the city of East St. Louis, a municipal corporation of that state, was awarded in this proceeding a peremptory mandamus. The directions of the judgment are as follows:
'That said defendant, the city of East St. Louis, do, through its proper corporate authorities, levy and collect full one per cent per annum taxes upon the assessed and equalized valuation of all the real and personal taxable property of said city for the year A. D. 1883, and subsequent years, until the full payment and discharge of all balance due upon said judgments in said petition mentioned, with lawful interest thereon, and the costs of said suits wherein said judgments were obtained, as also the costs of this suit.
'It is hereby further ordered and adjudged that said city do, through its proper corporate authorities, annually, commencing with the year A. D. 1883, appropriate and set apart three thousand dollars out of three-tenths of said one per cent. levy, and the sum of ten thousand dollars out of the remaining seven-tenths of said one per cent. levy, as a special fund for the payment of said judgments, interests, and costs, until the same are fully paid and discharged.
'It is further ordered and adjudged that said city annually, through its proper corporate authorities, pay over said sums, so soon as collected, to petitioner's attorney of record, to be applied to wards the payment of said judgments, interest, and costs.
The cause having been duly submitted to the court without the intervention of a jury, the court made the following special findings: '(1) That said city of East St. Louis is organized and existing under a special act of the legislature of illinois,...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Smith v. Gallagher
... ... Lalley, Finance Director of the City of Philadelphia, Alexander Hemphill, Controller ... 554] David Berger, City Sol., Philadelphia, Louis ... Lipschitz, Philadelphia, for appellant ... No person in the ... United States may constitutionally wear such ... East St. Louis v. United States, 110 U.S. 322, 325, 4 ... ...
-
State ex rel. Zoolog. Board v. City of St. Louis
...by the law to the discretion of the municipal authorities, and that discretion is not subject to judicial control. E. St. Louis v. United States, 110 U.S. 321; Clay County v. McAleer, 115 U.S. 616; United States v. Macon County, 99 U.S. 582. (a) The conduct of the city authorities in the ma......
-
Rorick v. Board of Com'rs of Everglades Drainage Dist.
...the same. The board cites numerous cases, such as White v. Mayor of Decatur, 119 Ala. 476, 23 So. 999; City of East St. Louis v. U. S. 110 U. S. 321, 4 S. Ct. 21, 28 L. Ed. 162; and Clay County v. U. S., 115 U. S. 616, 6 S. Ct. 199, 29 L. Ed. 482 (see, also, 44 C. J. 1374), to the effect th......
-
State ex rel. Carpenter v. St. Louis
...by the law to the discretion of the municipal authorities, and that discretion is not subject to judicial control. E. St. Louis v. United States, 110 U.S. 321; Clay County v. McAleer, 115 U.S. 616; United States v. Macon County, 99 U.S. 582. (b) The conduct of the city authorities in the ma......