Kentucky Union Co. v. Commonwealth
| Decision Date | 22 May 1908 |
| Citation | 128 Ky. 610,110 S.W. 398 |
| Parties | KENTUCKY UNION CO. v. COMMONWEALTH. |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
On rehearing. Petition for rehearing overruled.
For original opinion, see 108 S.W. 931.
Complaint is made in the petition for rehearing that the opinion herein fails to state whether or not article 3, c. 22, p. 115, Acts 1906, violates the Constitution of the United States. This question was fully considered and passed upon in the recent case of Eastern Kentucky Coal Lands Corporation v. Commonwealth, 106 S.W. 260, 32 Ky. Law Rep. 129, and it was there held that the said article was not violative of any of the provisions of the Constitution of the United States. It is specifically urged that article 3 violates section 10 of article 1 of the federal Constitution, in that it impairs the obligations of a contract, and the compact with Virginia is cited as the contract claimed to have been impaired.
Complaint is also made that said article violates section 1 of the fourteenth amendment, in that it deprives the owner of his property without due process of law, or that it denies to some persons the equal protection of the law, and also that it is violative of clause 1, § 10, art. 1, Const. U.S., which denies the right of any state to pass an ex post facto law. In none of these contentions do we concur. We see no reason for receding from the conclusions reached upon these several points in the case of Eastern Kentucky Coal Lands Corporation v. Commonwealth, above cited. There can be no serious objection to article 3 on the ground that it is an ex post facto law, in so far as the said article applies to years subsequent to 1906. But it is insisted that, as the act declares that delinquency for the years 1902, 1903, 1904 1905, and 1906 shall be cause for forfeiture, which might have been removed on or before January 1, 1907, by the payment of the taxes and interest and penalties provided by law for the redemption of land sold for the nonpayment of taxes, it visits upon the delinquent greater penalties than he was subject to prior to the passage of the act. This would be true if the delinquent had voluntarily paid the taxes for those years; but the result is not necessarily the same had the delinquent been proceeded against by an officer authorized by law to collect back taxes; however we are of opinion that the delinquent's liabilities for those years are to be measured by his liabilities...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pen-Ken Gas & Oil Corp. v. Warfield Natural Gas Co.
...and that in this connection we failed to give effect to the cases of Kentucky Union Company v. Commonwealth, 128 Ky. 610, 108 S.W. 931, 110 S.W. 398, and Davidson v. Lewis, 159 Ky. 798, 799, 169 S.W. In the Kentucky Union case the Court of Appeals of Kentucky decided that after a final judg......
-
Taylor v. Com.
...Commonwealth, 127 Ky. 667, 106 S.W. 260, 108 S.W. 1138, and the Kentucky Union Co. v. Commonwealth, 128 Ky. 610, 108 S.W. 931, 110 S.W. 398, 33 Ky. Law Rep. 9, 587. The decisions were affirmed in Kentucky Union Co. v. Com. of Kentucky, 219 U.S. 140, 31 S.Ct. 171, 55 L.Ed. Section 4 of the F......
-
Flinn v. Blakeman
...this order was entered prematurely. It was clearly erroneous, see Kentucky Union Co. v. Com., 128 Ky. 610, 108 S.W. 931, 110 S.W. 398, 33 Ky. Law Rep. 9, 49, 587, but no was prosecuted from it, and Flinn and Stevens are now attacking it collaterally in this proceeding, and this being a coll......
-
Flinn v. Blakeman
...unaware of things we have said in former opinions. "In Kentucky Union Company v. Commonwealth, 128 Ky. 610, 108 S.W. 931, 110 S.W. 398, 33 Ky. Law Rep. 9, 49, 587, one of the very first cases which arose under the Forfeiture Act, this court said: `The doctrine of caveat emptor applies in th......