Jenks v. Lima Township

CourtIndiana Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtPerkins, J.
CitationJenks v. Lima Township, 17 Ind. 326 (Ind. 1861)
Decision Date09 December 1861
PartiesJenks v. Lima Township

APPEAL from the Lagrange Circuit Court.

The judgment is reversed, with costs. Cause remanded.

J. M Flagg, for the appellant.

A Ellison, for the appellee.

OPINION

Perkins J.

The plaintiff filed the following complaint with a justice of the peace:

"Nathan Jenks complains of Lima township, in the county of Lagrange, and State of Indiana, and says, that at a special election in said township, on the day of -----, 1853, the proposition was submitted to the voters of said township, to assess a special tax upon the tax payers of said township, for common school purposes therein; that they voted in favor of such assessment, and the trustees thereupon assessed, or caused to be assessed, the sum of thirty cents on each hundred dollars of valuation of property therein, and fifty cents poll tax; that the plaintiff's tax, in consequence of said assessment, was eighty dollars; that the same was placed upon the duplicate of taxes for said county, and delivered to the treasurer thereof, to be collected; and that the treasurer collected the same, and paid it over to the township. The plaintiff, also, says that such vote, levy and assessment of said special tax, was erroneous, illegal, unconstitutional and void; and that he suffered damages, in consequence thereof, to the amount of eighty dollars, for which sum he demands judgment, and other proper relief.

"James M. Flagg, Attorney for Plaintiff."

The tax described in the complaint was illegal. The City of Lafayette v. Jenners, 10 Ind. 70. On appeal to the Circuit Court, the cause was dismissed for want of a sufficient complaint.

We think the Court erred in dismissing the cause. The complaint would not have been sufficiently certain, had the suit been commenced in the Circuit or Common Pleas Court, in showing that the tax had been forcibly collected; but, according to immemorial usage in this State, we think a forcible collection might have been proved under the complaint, and that it is sufficiently certain, being in an action commenced before a justice of the peace.

An illegal tax, voluntarily paid, can not be recovered back and the payment is regarded as voluntary, unless it be made to procure the release of person or property from the power of the officer; and protest, at the time of payment, in connection with other circumstances, may be evidence that the payment is made for such purpose. This is the rule in England. Oates v. Hudson, 5...

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
3 cases
  • City of Indianapolis v. Vajen
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • June 14, 1887
    ...be deemed to have been voluntarily made. To a party who thus pays an illegal demand the common law affords no right of recovery. Jenks v. Lima Tp., 17 Ind. 326; Tp. v. Jenks, 20 Ind. 301; Town of Ligonier v. Ackerman, 46 Ind. 552 (15 Am. R. 323); Board, etc., v. Armstrong, 91 Ind. 528; Boar......
  • Culbertson v. Board of Commissioners of Fayette County
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • March 12, 1935
    ...be deemed to have been voluntarily made. To a party who thus pays an illegal demand the common law affords no right of recovery. Jenks v. Lima Tp., 17 Ind. 326; Lima Tp. v. Jenks, 20 Ind. 301; Town Ligonier v. Ackerman, 46 Ind. 552 (15 Am. Rep. 323); Board, etc., v. Armstrong, 91 Ind. 528; ......
  • Board of Commissioners of Howard County v. Armstrong
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • November 27, 1883
    ... ... he was called upon by the assessor of Center township, Howard ... county, Indiana, which is the township where said guardian ... resides, also, the ... paid can not be recovered back. Jenks" v. Lima ... Township, 17 Ind. 326; Board, etc., v ... Ruckman, 57 Ind. 96 ...         \xC2" ... ...