Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1889

Worthen v. Quinn

Supreme Court of Arkansas · Decided May 15, 1889

52 Ark. 82

Cases that cite this one

4 later published cases cite this decision.

Territory Of Alaska v. American Can Company (9th Cir. 1959)
Territory of Alaska v. American Can Co. (9th Cir. 1959)
White River Lumber Co. v. State (Ark. 1928)
Enochs v. State ex rel. Roberson (Miss. 1922)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam :

Taxes: Enforcing lien for. When a Collector has exhausted his remedy by warrant for the distraint of taxes due on personal property, he may resort to his remedy by suit to collect them. Mansf. Dig., sec. 5757; Rapley v. Murray, 30 Ark.; State v Hirsch, 16 Lea, 40.

If goods are sold by the person charged with the taxes after the lien attached, they are liable to seizure in the hands of the vendee for the satisfaction of the lien (Bridwell v. Worthen, 46 Ark., 73), and if he sells them and the Collector cannot realize the taxes otherwise, he may maintain a suit in equity against the vendee to charge the proceeds of such sale with the payment of the taxes. Dickinson v. Harris, 48 Ark., 355; Anderson v. Bowles, 44 ib., 110; Mitchell v. Badgett, 33 ib., 387.

The judgment of the Chancery Court will be reversed and the cause remanded, with instructions to overrule the demurrer to the complaint.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.