Lewis v. Village of Boguechitto
Mississippi Supreme Court
From the chancery court of Lincoln county. Hon. Robert N. Miller, Special Chancellor. William L. Lewis and others, the appellants, were the complainants in the court below. The suit was once before in the supreme court, and the decision then made is reported—Boguechitto v. Lewis, 75 Miss., 711. The previous report gives the facts up to the time of that decision, and the code section in controversy is there quoted.
Read the full summary
From the chancery court of Lincoln county. Hon. Robert N. Miller, Special Chancellor. William L. Lewis and others, the appellants, were the complainants in the court below. The suit was once before in the supreme court, and the decision then made is reported—Boguechitto v. Lewis, 75 Miss., 711. The previous report gives the facts up to the time of that decision, and the code section in controversy is there quoted. After the decree of the chancery court refusing to sustain a motion to wholly dissolve the injunction had been affirmed by the supreme court and the case had been remanded, the…
1Opinion of the CourtWhitfield, J.
“ It is well settled that where a portion of a tax sought to be enjoined is legally due, and a portion not, the bill for injunction cannot be maintained, unless the portion properly collectible is paid or tendered.” This is the language of this court in M. & O. R. R. Co. v. Moseley, 52 Miss., 137. See, to the same effect, Cooley on Taxation (2d ed.), p. 763, note 1, with authorities; Cooley’s Const. Lim. (5th ed.), p. 645, note 4, with authorities; State Railroad Tax Cases, 92 U. S., 574, where it is said, page 617: “The state is not to be thus tied up, as to that of which there is no…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- McPherson v. Foster Bros.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1876
- National Bank v. KimballSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Harshman v. Bates CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Mobile & Ohio Railroad v. MoseleyMississippi Supreme Court · 1876
3Cited by1 opinion
- Rush v. PearsonMississippi Supreme Court · 1907