State v. State Board of Equalization
Montana Supreme Court
Original application for mandamus, by the State on the relation of the Attorney General, to compel the State Board ,of Equalization to make certain assessments of property of the Montana Power Company, the Great Falls Power Company, and other companies of the same nature, in accordance with the provisions-of section 1, Chapter 48, and section 6, Chapter 49, of the Laws of 1919. While it is true that ordinarily mandamus will not lie to control, direct or review the actions of…
Read the full summary
Original application for mandamus, by the State on the relation of the Attorney General, to compel the State Board ,of Equalization to make certain assessments of property of the Montana Power Company, the Great Falls Power Company, and other companies of the same nature, in accordance with the provisions-of section 1, Chapter 48, and section 6, Chapter 49, of the Laws of 1919. While it is true that ordinarily mandamus will not lie to control, direct or review the actions of assessing boards or officers, yet there are certain exceptions to this rule. One exception is where there is actual…
1Opinion of the Court
On Motion to Quash.
Opinion
2Per curiam
This is an original application for mandamus, on the relation of the attorney general, to compel the state board of equalization to make certain assessments in accordance with the provisions of section 1, Chapter 48, and section 6, Chapter 49, Laws of the Sixteenth Legislative Assembly. The material facts alleged in the affidavit are:
That the Montana Power Company, Great Falls Power Company, Thompson Falls Power Company and Montana Reservoir and Irrigation Company are corporations organized and existing under the laws of Montana; that they are what is known as…
3Cases cited15 opinions
- Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. BackusSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Fargo v. HartSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. BackusSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. TaggartSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- State ex rel. Hay v. AldersonMontana Supreme Court · 1914
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by57 opinions
- Bunten v. Rock Springs Grazing Ass'nWyoming Supreme Court · 1923
- Great Northern Utilities Co. v. Public Service CommissionMontana Supreme Court · 1930
- Mills v. State Board of EqualizationMontana Supreme Court · 1934
- State Ex Rel. City of Missoula v. HolmesMontana Supreme Court · 1935
- Johnson v. JohnsonMontana Supreme Court · 1932
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.