Durham v. Board of Comm'rs of Montgomery County

CourtIndiana Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtElliott, J.
CitationDurham v. Board of Comm'rs of Montgomery County, 95 Ind. 182 (Ind. 1884)
Decision Date19 April 1884
Docket Number11,335
PartiesDurham v. Board of Commissioners of Montgomery County

From the Montgomery Circuit Court.

Judgment affirmed.

G. W Paul and J. E. Humphries, for appellant.

M Thompson, W. B. Herod and W. H. Thompson, for appellee.

OPINION

Elliott, J.

This is an action to recover taxes alleged to have been assessed against the appellant by an unauthorized special assessment.

It has long been the rule in this State that there can be no recovery for taxes voluntarily paid, even though paid under protest, unless there is a statute authorizing such a recovery. Jenks v. Lima Tp., 17 Ind. 326; Martin v. Stanfield, 17 Ind. 336; Lima Tp. v. Jenks, 20 Ind. 301; City of Indianapolis v. Langsdale, 29 Ind. 486; Board, etc., v. Ruckman, 57 Ind. 96. If the appellant is entitled to maintain this action, it must be on the ground that there is a statute authorizing it. There is now in force a statute authorizing the refunding of taxes in certain cases. City of Indianapolis v McAvoy, 86 Ind. 587. But although there is such a statute, still there is no cause of action stated in the complaint, because it is not shown that the claim of the appellant is within it. An elementary rule is that one who founds a right of action on a statute must make a case within its terms. This the appellant has not done. In order to make a case within the statute, it must be shown, not only that the special assessment was made by an unauthorized person, and in an irregular manner, but also that the property upon which the taxes were laid was not justly subject to the assessment. It is not enough to show that the special assessment was irregular and unauthorized, for it must also be shown that the taxes were unjustly levied. A man can not...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
36 cases
  • City of Indianapolis v. Vajen
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • June 14, 1887
    ...v. McAvoy, supra; Board, etc., v. Graham, 98 Ind. 279; Newsom v. Board, etc., 92 Ind. 229; Board, etc., v. Ruckman, 57 Ind. 96; Durham v. Board, etc., 95 Ind. 182; Board, etc., v. Murphy, 100 Ind. Board, etc., v. Armstrong, 91 Ind. 528; People, ex rel., v. Supervisors, etc., 51 N.Y. 401. Se......
  • Strosser v. City of Fort Wayne
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • February 25, 1885
    ...a purchaser at a tax sale, so that the case is fully within the rule laid down in City of Indianapolis v. McAvoy, 86 Ind. 587; Durham v. Board, etc., 95 Ind. 182; Board, etc., v. Armstrong, 91 Ind. The second paragraph of the appellee's answer expressly admits that the land of the appellant......
  • White River School Tp., Randolph County v. Anchor Hocking Glass Corp.
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • July 6, 1960
    ...justly nor equitably due. Board of Commissioners of Howeard County v. Armstrong, Guardian, 1883, 91 Ind. 528; Durham v. Board of Commissioners of Montgomery Co., 1884, 95 Ind. 182; Board of Commissioners of Henry County v. Murphy, 1884, 100 Ind. 570; Board of Commissioners of Carroll County......
  • Jackson Hill Coal And Coke Co. v. Board of Commissioners of the County of Sullivan
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • March 13, 1914
    ... ... 587; ... City of Indianapolis v. Vajen (1887), 111 ... Ind. 240, 12 N.E. 311; Durham v. Board, ... etc. (1883), 95 Ind. 182; Nyce v ... Schmoll (1907), 40 Ind.App. 555, 82 N.E. 539; ... ...
  • Get Started for Free