Robertson v. Thomas
Decision Date | 17 June 1918 |
Citation | 118 Miss. 423,79 So. 289 |
Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Parties | ROBERTSON, STATE REVENUE AGENT v. THOMAS |
March 1918
APPEAL from the chancery court of Lee county, HON. A. J. MCINTYRE Chancellor.
Suit by J. M. Thomas against Strokes V. Robertson, State Revenue Agent. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.
The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court.
Judgment affirmed.
Thos H. Johnston, for appellant.
W. D. & J. R. Anderson and Robins & Thomas, for appellee.
This is an appeal by the state revenue agent, from the judgment of the chancery court of Lee county, and involves the question of the power of the state revenue agent to bring suits on behalf of drainage districts created under chapter 39 of the Code of 1906. Thomas was treasurer of said district, which had been created in conformity to the Code sections, and certain assessments had been collected by the tax collector, who had deposited the funds so collected in a bank, not having placed them in a depository. The state revenue agent checked up the tax collector's books, found the money had not been paid over to the treasurer of the drainage district or placed in a depository, and made demand upon the tax collector for the funds so deposited in the bank. The tax collector gave a check for the said amount, and this suit was filed in the chancery court to restrain and prevent the revenue agent's collecting the check and retaining his twenty per cent. of the said funds. On the hearing the chancellor held that the revenue agent had no power to bring the suit, and granted the relief prayed in the bill, from which decree this appeal is prosecuted.
The powers and duties of the revenue agent are set forth in section 4738 and section 4739, Code of 1906 (section 7056 and section 7057), which reads as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Board of Drainage Com'rs of Drainage Dist. No. 10 of Bolivar County v. Board of Drainage Com'rs of Washington County
... ... 23186 Supreme Court of Mississippi January 29, 1923 ... APPEAL ... from chancery court of Washington county, HON. E. N. THOMAS, ... Chancellor ... Suit by ... the Board of Drainage Commissioners of Washington County and ... others, against the Board of Drainage ... support of the author he cites Baltimore v ... Meredith's Ford, etc., Turnpike Co., 104 Md. 351, 19 ... R. C. L., section 338; Robertson v. Thomas, 118 ... Miss. 423; 19 Corpus Juris. 615. Drainage or reclamation ... districts have generally been held to be public or ... ...
-
Standard Oil Co. v. National Surety Co.
...be considered as a part of the county, nor is it a municipality, nor is it, we submit, a political sub-division of the state. Robertson v. Thomas, 118 Miss. 423. drainage district was not intended to be within the purview of the statute, and the court was manifestly correct in sustaining th......
-
Tallahatchie Drainage Dist. No. 1 v. Yocona-Tallahatchie Drainage Dist. No. 1.
... ... This doctrine is repeated in the case of Dixie Rubber Co ... v. Catoe, 110 So. 670, and further illustrated in ... Robertson v. Country Club, 212 Ala. 621; ... Southern Realty Co. v. Tchula Co-Operative Store, ... 114 Miss. 322. We are not asking any court to aid us in ... state and makes it a corporation, a subdivision of the state ... It is not strictly a municipal corporation. Robinson v ... Thomas, 118 Miss. 423. It is not like a board of ... supervisors which can speak only through its minutes. It can ... be held liable on implied contracts ... ...
-
Edward Hines Yellow Pine Trustees v. State ex rel. Moore
...433, 58 So. 475; Pearman v. Robertson, 119 Miss. 384, 80 So. 876; Robertson v. Monroe County, 118 Miss. 520, 79 So. 184; Robertson v. Thomas, 118 Miss. 423, 79 So. 289; Jefferson Davis County v. Lumber Company, 94 Miss. 530, So. 611. It is true that in State v. Fitzgerald, 76 Miss. 502, 24 ......