Supreme Court of the United States, 1893

Northern Pacific Railroad v. Walker

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided April 3, 1893 · Fuller

148 U.S. 391; 13 S. Ct. 650; 37 L. Ed. 494; 1893 U.S. LEXIS 2240 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Mr. Frederick M. Dudley and Mr. James McHaught for appellant., Mr. 8. L. Glaspell, (with whom was Mr. Edgar W. Gamp on the brief,) for appellees.

Cases that cite this one

25 later published cases cite this decision.

Gypsy Oil Co. v. Oklahoma Tax Commission (United States District Court, Oklahoma Northern 1934)
Eaton v. Hoge (8th Cir. 1905)
Eliasen v. Green Bay & Western Railroad (District Court, E.D. Wisconsin 1982)
Essie H. Jewell v. Grain Dealers Mutual Insurance Co. (5th Cir. 1961)
Smith v. Abbate (District Court, S.D. New York 1961)
Lawrence Vraney v. County of Pinellas (5th Cir. 1958)
Fechheimer Bros. v. Barnwasser (District Court, E.D. Kentucky 1944)
Central Mexico Light & Power Co. v. Munch (2d Cir. 1940)
First State Bank v. Chicago, R. I. & P. R. (8th Cir. 1933)
First Nat. Bank of Woodbine v. Harrison County (8th Cir. 1932)
Vicksburg, S. & P. Ry. Co. v. Nattin (District Court, W.D. Louisiana 1931)
Risley v. City of Utica (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York 1909)
Fechheimer Bros. v. Barnwasser (6th Cir. 1945)
Risley v. City of Utica (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York 1910)
Larabee v. Dolley (District Court, D. Kansas 1909)
Turner v. Jackson Lumber Co. (5th Cir. 1908)
Board of Trustees of Whitman College v. Berryman (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Washington 1907)
McDaniel v. Traylor (United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas 1903)
City of Hutchinson v. Beckham (8th Cir. 1902)
Citizens' Bank v. Cannon (Supreme Court of the United States 1896)
Sovereign Camp Woodmen of the World v. O'Neill (Supreme Court of the United States 1924)
American Railroad v. Municipality of San Juan (District Court, D. Puerto Rico 1917)
Fishback v. Western Union Telegraph Co. (Supreme Court of the United States 1896)
Linehan Railway Transfer Co. v. Pendergrass (8th Cir. 1895)
In re City Nat. Bank of Ft. Worth (Supreme Court of the United States 1880)

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

Mr. Chief Justice Fuller

delivered the opinion of the court.

■ This was a bill filed in the Circuit Court of the Hnited States for the District of North Dakota, November 21, 1890, by the *392 Northern Pacific Bailroad Company against the county auditors of twelve counties of that State, praying for a decree adjudging certain assessments and taxes levied upon lands in each of said counties to be illegal and void and a cloud upon complainant’s title, and that defendants and- each of them be restrained from selling or attempting to sell said lands or any portion thereof,- or issuing any tax certificates therefor. The ■ cáse proceeded to a decree, dismissing the bill for want of éqúity, whereupon it was carried by appeal to the Circuit ’ Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.

Certain questions or propositions of- law, concerning which that court desired the instruction of the Supreme Court for a proper decision of the .case, were certified to this court, and argument having been had upon the certificate, we directed a certiorari to issue requiring the whole record and cause to be sent up for consideration. This has been done, and we find upon examination that the case comes directly within Walter v. Northeastern Railroad, 147 U. S. 370.

The record does not show that the amount of the assessments and taxes, forming the subject of the litigation, levied in either or all of the counties, exceeded the sum of $2000; and even if this had been so as to the aggregate, the defendants could not have been joined in a single suit, and the jurisdiction thus been sustained. Upon the face of the record, therefore, the Circuit Court was without jurisdiction, (act of March 3,1887, 24 Stat. 552, c. 373; act of August 13, 1888, 25 Stat. 433, c. 866,) but as perhaps by amendment the bill might be retained as to some one of the defendants, we will not direct its dismissal.

In pursuance of section 10 of the Judiciary Act of March 3, 1891, %6 Stat. 889, c. 517, the decree of the Circuit Court is reversed at the costs of the appellant, and the cause remanded to that court with a directionfor further proceedings in conformity with this opinion.

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