Mouton v. Sinclair Oil and Gas Company
| Decision Date | 19 May 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 26751.,26751. |
| Citation | 410 F.2d 717 |
| Parties | Ashton J. MOUTON, Collector of Revenue, State of Louisiana, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SINCLAIR OIL AND GAS COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Cyrus A. Greco, Carl E. Cooper, Emmett E. Batson, John B. Levy, Huey H. Breaux, La. Dept. of Revenue, Legal Div., Baton Rouge, La., for plaintiff-appellant.
Clyde R. Brown, Monroe, for defendant-appellee; Shotwell, Brown & Sperry, Monroe, La., of counsel.
Before AINSWORTH and SIMPSON, Circuit Judges, and MITCHELL, District Judge.
This suit was originally filed by the Louisiana Collector of Revenue in a Louisiana state court to collect certain state severance taxes claimed to be due by defendant Sinclair Oil and Gas Company. Sinclair removed the suit to the federal district court and the Collector's motion to remand for lack of jurisdiction was denied. Sinclair's motion for summary judgment based on our prior holding in Mississippi River Fuel Corporation v. Cocreham, 5 Cir., 1967, 382 F. 2d 929, rehearing denied, 1968, 390 F.2d 34, cert. denied, Mouton v. Mississippi River Fuel Corp., 390 U.S. 1015, 88 S.Ct. 1264, 20 L.Ed.2d 164 (1968), was granted and the Collector of Revenue has appealed.
All of the legal contentions raised by the Collector in this case have heretofore been considered and ruled on adversely to him by this Court in the Mississippi River Fuel case. (See our per curiam decision released this day in the companion cases of Shell Oil Co. v. Mouton, No. 26493, and Mouton v. Shell Oil Co., No. 26730, 410 F.2d 715)
Nor is there any merit in the Collector's contention that this suit was improperly removed from the Louisiana state court to the federal district court since it is apparent that the federal court has jurisdiction both under diversity of citizenship, 28 U.S.C. § 1332, in that the Collector is acting unconstitutionally and therefore in an individual capacity and not as the official representative of the State of Louisiana, and because a federal question is presented, 28 U.S.C. § 1331, in that the Collector is attempting to collect severance taxes on oil and gas produced from a federal military enclave, Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana, on which the United States has exclusive jurisdiction as provided by Article I, Section 8, Clause 17, of the United States Constitution. See Mississippi River Fuel Corporation, 382 F. 2d at 934, citing Georgia R. R. & Banking...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nuclear Engineering Co. v. Scott
...The proposition advanced by the Seney court has apparently been arguably embraced by but one reported decision, Mouton v. Sinclair Oil & Gas Co., 410 F.2d 717 (5th Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 398 U.S. 957, 90 S.Ct. 2163, 26 L.Ed.2d 542 (1970), while it has been generally criticized. Eure v. N......
-
Shell Oil Co. v. Secretary, Revenue and Taxation
...v. Fontenot, 234 F.2d 898 (5th Cir.1956).9 See also Shell Oil v. Mouton, 410 F.2d 715 (5th Cir.1969) and Mouton v. Sinclair Oil and Gas Company, 410 F.2d 717 (5th Cir.1969), cert. denied, 398 U.S. 957, 90 S.Ct. 2163, 26 L.Ed.2d 542 (1970), wherein the Fifth Circuit issued per curiam opinion......
-
State of Ala. ex rel. Galanos v. STAR SERV. & PET.
...cases as supporting its interpretation: State of Ohio ex rel Seney v. Swift & Co., 270 F. 141 (6th Cir.1921) and Mouton v. Sinclair Oil and Gas Co., 410 F.2d 717 (5th Cir.1969). Seney involved a suit by a county prosecutor to enjoin violations of an Ohio anti-trust law. The court therein in......
-
First National Bank of Bellevue v. Bank of Bellevue, Civ. No. 71-0-430.
...the United States, but also is authorized by the Secretary of the Treasury to establish banks on military bases. See Mouton v. Sinclair Oil and Gas Company, 410 F.2d 717 5th Cir. 1969; and Teague v. Grand River Dam Authority, 279 F.Supp. 703 N.D. Okl.1968. This additional aspect of the bank......