Hill v. Scotland County Court
| Decision Date | 11 November 1887 |
| Citation | 32 F. 716 |
| Parties | HILL v. SCOTLAND COUNTY COURT. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri |
John H. Overall and F. T. Hughes, for relator.
H. A Cunningham, for respondent.
THAYER J., (orally.)
I have examined the return filed by James R. Nesbitt, county clerk of Scotland county, and also the return filed by Joel Ewing collector of Scotland county, to an alternative writ of mandamus issued in case No. 2,610, of Hill v. Scotland Co. which commanded the county clerk to make out a supplemental tax book, and extend therein certain taxes that were levied by the county court of Scotland county on August 30, 1887 and which commanded the county collector, when the taxes should have been so extended, to proceed with the collection of the same.
Now the only reason assigned by the county clerk why he should not make out the supplemental tax book and extend the taxes therein is that he was enjoined by an order of the circuit court of Scotland county from so doing on the sixteenth day of September last. The only reason assigned by the county collector for failing to obey the writ is that he was enjoined at the same time from collecting those taxes, and furthermore, that he cannot proceed to collect the taxes until he is furnished with the tax book, and that the county clerk has been enjoined from furnishing such tax book. The force of the reasons assigned by these officers why they should not obey the command of the alternative writ, and also the order of the county court, or rather the want of force in the reasons assigned, is demonstrated by the following statement of facts:
Judgment was rendered in this case on the thirty-first of March, 1886 against Scotland county, and a peremptory writ of mandamus was awarded against the county judges of Scotland county, to compel them to levy a tax to pay that judgment, on the twenty-seventh day of April, 1887. In accordance with that writ, the county court ordered a levy of 14 mills on the dollar upon all the taxable property in the county, on the thirtieth of August 1887, and by the same order directed the county clerk to make out a supplemental tax book, and extend the tax levied therein, and also directed the county collector to proceed and collect the taxes, and account for them as other taxes are accounted for. On the fifteenth of September, 1887, a suit by the state of Missouri at the relation of John B. Mudd, prosecuting attorney of Scotland county, against the county clerk, county collector, and county judges of Scotland county, was filed in the circuit court of Scotland county; and in that proceeding, on the sixteenth of September, an injunction was awarded against all the defendants, against extending the taxes on the supplemental tax book, and against collecting the tax of 14 mills on the dollar, which had...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jackson Equipment & Service Co. v. Dunlop
...cannot be litigated in mandamus proceedings to enforce the judgment. Ralls County Court v. U.S. 105 U.S. 733, 26 L.Ed. 1220; Hill v. Scotland County Court, 32 F. 716; Fleming v. Trowsdale, 29 C. C. A. 106, 54 U. S. App. 574, 85 F. 189; Riverside County v. Thompson, 122 F. 860; Kinney v. Eas......
-
Bushnell v. Mississippi & Fox River Drainage Dist. of Clark County
...al. v. Parker et al. (N. C.), 95 S.E. 170; 34 C. J. 967; Harshman v. Knox Co., 122 U.S. 306; Ralls Co. v. U.S. 105 U.S. 733; Hill v. Scotland Co. Ct., 32 F. 716; Hicks v. Cleveland, 106 F. 459; Woods Construction Company v. Yankton County, 54 F.2d 304. (6) A judgment is a debt of the highes......
-
Mississippi and Fox River Drainage Dist. of Clark County v. Ruddick
... ... A. J. AND C. A. RUDDICK, APPELLANTS Court of Appeals of Missouri, St. LouisNovember 7, 1933 ... Appeal ... from the ... J. 967; Harshman v. Knox Co., 122 U.S. 306; ... Ralls Co. v. United States, 105 U.S. 733; Hill ... v. Scotland Co. Ct., 32 F. 716; Hicks v ... Cleveland, 106 F. 459. (2) Landowners are not ... ...