Moore v. Gas Securities Co.
Decision Date | 05 December 1921 |
Docket Number | 5719. |
Citation | 278 F. 111 |
Parties | MOORE, County Assessor, et al. v. GAS SECURITIES CO. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Bert Martin and Samuel H. Morrow, both of Denver, Colo., for plaintiffs in error.
Platt Rogers, of Denver, Colo. (Edmund Rogers and Robert G. Strong both of Denver, Colo., on the brief), for defendant in error.
Before CARLAND, Circuit Judge, and YOUMANS and JOHNSON, District judges.
This cause was submitted to the court below on the petition for mandamus and the response thereto. There was no dispute as to the essential facts, either in the court below or in this court.
The East Denver municipal irrigation district was a corporation organized on the 22d day of November, 1909, under an act of the General Assembly of Colorado entitled 'An act in relation to irrigation districts,' approved May 3, 1905 (Laws 1905, p. 246), and all acts amendatory thereof. On the 8th of October, 1910, the landowners and taxpayers of the irrigation district, at an election duly held, authorized an issue of bonds to the amount of $3,000,000 for the purpose of constructing an irrigation system for the lands of the district. On the 10th of October, 1910, the board of directors of the district, pursuant to such election directed the issuance of bonds in the amount authorized by the voters. During the year 1914 the defendant in error, a corporation of the state of New York, purchased bonds of the district to the amount of $628,500. On the 8th of May, 1919 the defendant in error obtained judgment in the court below on interest coupons on said bonds to the amount of $226,170.95, which judgment was and is unpaid.
In December, 1919, the court below issued a writ of peremptory mandamus, commanding the board of county commissioners of Adams county, Colo., to fix the rate and make the levy to pay the judgment. Levies for each of the years 1919 and 1920 were to be at such rate as to be equivalent to $2 upon each acre in the district, and for the year 1921 at such rate as would be necessary to complete the payment of the judgment. The defendant in error demanded of E. B. Martin, one of the plaintiffs in error, that he, as assessor, extend the levy for the payment of the judgment in the proper column of the tax list opposite each piece of real property assessed, and that he total said taxes with the state, county, and other taxes, and at the end of the tax list prorate the total of said taxes to the several funds. The assessor proceeded to comply with such demand, but on the 22d of January, 1920, the Colorado state tax commission ordered him not to incorporate irrigation district taxes in the total of general property taxes. The said assessor then refused to comply with the demand of defendant in error. The order of the state tax commission was by letter, which reads as follows:
Colorado Tax Commission, 'E. B. Morgan, Chairman.'
After stating the foregoing facts and setting out the order of the Colorado tax commission, the petition of the defendant in error contains the following allegations:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Board of County Com'rs. of Big Horn County v. Bench Canal Drainage Dist.
... ... 21; State ex rel. Land Office v ... Board of County Commissioners, 25 P.2d 1074; St ... Louis Company v. Trust Company, 52 F.2d 431; Moore ... v. Gas Securities Co., 278 F. 111. The Wyoming statute ... makes uncollected personal taxes a lien on real estate, ... except as to prior ... ...
-
Rorick v. Board of Com'rs of Everglades Drainage Dist.
...105 U. S. 278, 26 L. Ed. 1090; Wolff v. New Orleans, 103 U. S. 358, 26 L. Ed. 395; Moore v. Otis (C. C. A.) 275 F. 747; Moore v. Gas Securities Co. (C. C. A.) 278 F. 111; Jinkins v. Entzminger (Fla.) 135 So. 785. As was said in United States ex rel. Von Hoffman v. City of Quincy, supra: "A ......
-
State v. Board of Com'rs of Cascade County
...a remedy which is as efficacious as that contained in the law at the time of the issuance of the bonds. In the case of Moore v. Gas Securities Co., supra, is said: "Of course, the Legislature was not without power to change the remedy, but in doing so it was obliged to give the bondholder s......
-
Baccus v. Banks
... ... of extinguishing the lien before all the installments were ... due. The statute held unconstitutional in Moore v. Otis, ... 8 Cir., 275 F. 747, had the effect of the statute in ... Nelson v. Pitts, and also had the effect of depriving the ... bond holder ... 1, 14 L.R.A.,N.S., ... 400; Moore, County Treasurer, v. Otis et al., 8 ... Cir., 275 F. 747; Moore v. Gas Securities Co., 8 ... Cir., 278 F. 111.' ... Pertinent ... to the trust phase of the situation there was declared in ... Spitzer v. City ... ...