Thompson v. Hall
| Decision Date | 07 June 1927 |
| Docket Number | (No. 5689) |
| Parties | A. B. Thompson, who sues etc. v. Grant P. Hall, State TaxCommissioner et al. |
| Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
1. Licenses Statute Requiring License Tax of One Operating Prohibited Gaming Device is Invalid, as Against Public Policy (Code, c. 32 § 1).
A statute requiring a license tax of one operating a gaming device prohibited by law is invalid and unenforceable as against public policy. (p. 77.)
(Licenses, 37 C. J. § 48 [Anno].)
2. Same Operator of Illegal Gaming Device May Not Enjoin Collecting License Tax Under Statute, but Will be Left to Legal Remedy (Code, c. 32, §§ 1, 42a).
The equitable maxim, "He who comes into Equity must come with clean hands", will be applied to the operator of an illegal gaming device seeking by injunction to restrain the collection of a license tax required by statute of those engaging in such business.(p. 79).
(Equity, 21 C. J. §§ 163, 178; Licenses, 37 C. J. § 136.)
Appeal from Circuit Court, Mercer County.
Suit by A. B. Thompson against Grant P. Hall, State Tax Commissioner, and others for an injunction. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal.
Reversed.
John T. Simms, for appellants.
A. J. Lubliner and John Kce, for appellee.
This is a suit to enjoin the collection of an authorized license tax. On final hearing the circuit court perpetually enjoined the defendants, Grant P. Hall, State tax commissioner, and R. C. Lilly, deputy State tax commissioner, and all other deputies, agents, employees, and representatives of said State tax commissioner "from collecting by any proceeding whatsoever any tax, assessment, license or other charge from the plaintiff, upon and for the sale of any goods, wares, chattels, or merchandise by means of certain donation cards or 'punch boards' owned, furnished and delivered to the said plaintiff by Bluefield Lodge No. 269, Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks, of Bluefield, West Virginia". The defendants appeal.
The bill shows that the plaintiff is a member of a voluntary fraternal and charitable organization, known as the Bluefield Lodge No. 269, Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks, composed of 1, 800 members with headquarters at Bluefield, Mercer County, West Virginia; that with the view of securing funds for its charitable purposes, by the operation of "punch boards", whereby articles of merchandise of differ- out values are awarded to those buying chances on the boards, the lodge obtained from the tax commissioner, through his deputy, R. C. Lilly, a license in words and figures following, to-wit:
STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA June 20, 1863 State of West Virginia (Seal)
Montani Semper Liberi Office of State Tax Commissioner, ss:
"This is to certify that the undersigned, in pursuance of the authority vested in him, by Section 42a of Chapter 32 of the Code, as enacted by the regular session of the Legislature of 1909, has this day granted to Elks Club (No. 269) of Bluefield, Mercer County, West Virginia, a license to operate Punch Board on second floor of Elks Bldg. Beginning 15th day of November, 1925, and ending 15th day of February, 1926, and has assessed and collected the license tax of $16.67 Dollars, and a penalty of............................Dollars.
Given under my hand this 30th day of November, 1925.
By R. C. Lilly, Deputy.
NOTE: It is distinctly understood that the issuance of this certificate and the payment of the license tax assessed does not legalize any act which otherwise may be in violation of law or exempt any person or firm from any penalty for such violation.
That the plaintiff, as an agent of the Lodge, operated a punch board in Mercer County (outside the Lodge building) within the period covered by said license; and that the defendant, R. C. Lilly, deputy tax commissioner, has demanded of the plaintiff and other members of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Farley v. Graney
...may not enact a statute which imposes a license tax upon a person who engages in the operation of an unlawful business. Thompson v. Hall, 104 W.Va. 76, 138 S.E. 579. That the operation of a junk yard is a lawful business is generally recognized by the courts. Town of Vestal v. Bennett, 199 ......
-
Oates v. Oates
...that the conduct of the plaintiff and defendant has been such that neither is entitled to relief in a court of equity. Thompson v. Hall, 104 W.Va. 76, 138 S.E. 579; Pittsburg & West Virginia Gas Co. v. Nicholson, 87 W.Va. 540, 105 S.E. 784, 12 A.L.R. 1392; Bates v. Swiger, 40 W.Va. 420, 21 ......
-
Oates v. Oates
...that the conduct of the plaintiff and defendant has been such that neither is entitled to relief in a court of equity. Thompson v. Hall, 104 W.Va. 76, 138 S.E. 579; Pittsburg & West Virginia Gas Co. v. Nicholson, 87 540, 105 S.E. 784, 12 A.L.R. 1392; Bates v. Swiger, 40 W.Va. 420, 21 S.E. 8......
-
Ingram v. Bearden
... ... tendency of this policy is to encourage rather than ... discourage the evil sought to be avoided. Thompson v ... Hall, 104 W.Va. 76, 138 S.E. 579. The foregoing ... observation is pertinent in that said authorities, together ... with the Alexander ... ...