People of the State of California v. San Pablo Co, No. 257
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | GRAY |
| Citation | 13 S.Ct. 876,37 L.Ed. 747,149 U.S. 308 |
| Parties | PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA v. SAN PABLO & T. R. CO |
| Docket Number | No. 257 |
| Decision Date | 10 May 1893 |
v.
SAN PABLO & T. R. CO.
Statement by Mr. Justice GRAY:
This was action, brought March 10, 1886, by the state of California against the San Pablo & Tulare Railroad Company, a corporation of California, in the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, (and thence removed by the defendant into the circuit court of the United States, upon the ground that it was a suit arising under the constitution and laws of the United States,) to recover taxes assessed by the state board of equalization, under sections 4 and 10 of article 13 of the constitution of California, (which are copied in the margin,1) as state and county taxes for the year July 1,
Page 309
1885-June 30, 1886, upon the defendant's franchise, roadway, roadbed, rails, and rolling stock in the counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, and San Joaquin.
The defendant, in its answer, filed March 19, 1886, and averring the facts necessary to present the question, set up the following defense: 'The provision of section 4 of article 13 of the constitution of the state of California, providing for the assessment of the property of railroad and other quasi public corporations, is in contravention of the provisions of the fourteenth amend ment of the constitution of the United States, in that it discriminates against such corporations, in this: That whereas, under said section 4 of said article 13 of the constitution of the state of California, if the property of natural persons, or corporations not quasi public, has a mortgage, lien, or incumbrance thereon, they are not liable to assessment or taxation upon such property, but only upon the value of their interest in such property over and above the value of such mortgage lien or incumbrance, whereas, in the case of the property of railroad and other quasi public corporations, no such allowance or deduction is made, had, or allowed with respect to any mortgage, lien, or incumbrance there may be upon such property; and also in this: that while section 10 of article 13 of the constitution of the state of California provides the same mode for the assessment of the franchises, roadway, roadbed, rails, and rolling stock of all railroads operated in more than one county, whether such property be owned by
Page 310
railroad or other quasi public corporations or by private corporations or by natural persons, yet section 4 of article 13 of said constitution permits or allows indebtedness secured by mortgage, trust deed, or otherwise, to be deducted from the value of such property only when it is owned by natural persons or corporations not quasi public, and denies such deduction when the property is owned by railroad or other quasi public corporations.'
On July 14, 1886, the attorneys for the parties filed in this and three similar cases the following stipulation in writing:
'It is hereby stipulated that jury trials in the above-entitled actions are hereby waived, and that said causes may be submitted to the court upon the testimony referred to in the stipulation this day made and filed in the case of The People of the State of California v. The Central Pacific Railroad Company, subject to the same terms and conditions. It is hereby further stipulated that special findings of facts in all of the above-entitled actions are waived. It is hereby further stipulated and agreed that the said case of The People of the State of California v. The Central Pacific Railroad Company shall by the losing party be taken to the supreme court of the United States, and that the decision of said court in said case shall be applicable to, and be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hearst Corp. v. Clyne
...case pending before the tribunal (Matter of State Ind. Comm., 224 N.Y. 13, 16, 119 N.E. 1027; California v. San Pablo & Tulare R.R., 149 U.S. 308, 314, 13 S.Ct. 876, 878, 37 L.Ed. 747). This principle, which forbids courts to pass on academic, hypothetical, moot, or otherwise abstract quest......
-
United States v. Muhtorov, 18-1366
...rules of law" outside of resolving a concrete issue presented by parties with adverse legal interests. California v. San Pablo &T. R. Co., 149 U.S. 308, 314 (1893). There is no adverse legal interest to the government's submission of proposed targeting and minimization procedures, and the F......
-
In re Gestational Agreement, No. 20160796
...and simplyPage 39 relied on a three paragraph United States Supreme Court opinion. See id. (citing California v. San Pablo & T.R. Co., 149 U.S. 308, 314 (1893)). And although we have made similar statements about advisory opinions from time to time, see, e.g., State v. Stromquist, 639 P.2d ......
-
Cover v. Schwartz, No. 74
...L.Ed. 379; Elwell v. Fosdick, 134 U.S. 500, 10 S.Ct. 598, 33 L.Ed. 998; cf. People of State of California v. San Pablo & Tulane Railroad, 149 U.S. 308, 13 S.Ct. 876, 37 L.Ed. 747; Mills v. Green, supra, 159 U.S. at page 654, 16 S.Ct. 132, 40 L.Ed. 293; Kimball v. Kimball, 174 U.S. 158, 162,......
-
Hearst Corp. v. Clyne
...case pending before the tribunal (Matter of State Ind. Comm., 224 N.Y. 13, 16, 119 N.E. 1027; California v. San Pablo & Tulare R.R., 149 U.S. 308, 314, 13 S.Ct. 876, 878, 37 L.Ed. 747). This principle, which forbids courts to pass on academic, hypothetical, moot, or otherwise abstract quest......
-
United States v. Muhtorov, 18-1366
...rules of law" outside of resolving a concrete issue presented by parties with adverse legal interests. California v. San Pablo &T. R. Co., 149 U.S. 308, 314 (1893). There is no adverse legal interest to the government's submission of proposed targeting and minimization procedures, and the F......
-
In re Gestational Agreement, No. 20160796
...and simplyPage 39 relied on a three paragraph United States Supreme Court opinion. See id. (citing California v. San Pablo & T.R. Co., 149 U.S. 308, 314 (1893)). And although we have made similar statements about advisory opinions from time to time, see, e.g., State v. Stromquist, 639 P.2d ......
-
Cover v. Schwartz, No. 74
...L.Ed. 379; Elwell v. Fosdick, 134 U.S. 500, 10 S.Ct. 598, 33 L.Ed. 998; cf. People of State of California v. San Pablo & Tulane Railroad, 149 U.S. 308, 13 S.Ct. 876, 37 L.Ed. 747; Mills v. Green, supra, 159 U.S. at page 654, 16 S.Ct. 132, 40 L.Ed. 293; Kimball v. Kimball, 174 U.S. 158, 162,......