City of Columbia v. Tindal
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1 This was an application to this court in its original jurisdiction, for an injunction. On the call of the cause for a hearing, both sides claimed the right to open and reply, and the court ruled that the petitioner was so entitled.
Read the full summary
1 This was an application to this court in its original jurisdiction, for an injunction. On the call of the cause for a hearing, both sides claimed the right to open and reply, and the court ruled that the petitioner was so entitled. The petition was as follows: To the Honorable the Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the State of South Carolina: The petition of the city of Columbia respectfully showeth to your honors: 1. That your petitioner is a municipal corporation of the State of South Carolina, having been originally chartered by the legislature of said State as…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Pope.
The defendants, in pursuance of the provisions of an act of the General Assembly of this State, en*554titled “An act to provide an additional remedy for the collection of taxes, costs, and penalties upon lands past due and unpaid for eight months,” approved 24th December, 1892 (21 Stat., 82), was proceeding to collect by levy and sale by the sheriff of Bichlaud County what he claimed was taxes due by the plaintiff to the State and county of Bichland since the year 1877. Whereupon the plaintiff started this action in the original…
2Cited by4 opinions
- State v. City of ColumbiaSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1920
- Pascoe v. WilsonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2016
- State v. City of ColumbiaSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1920
- State v. City of ColumbiaSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1920