Union Pacific R. Co. v. Weld County
247 U.S. 282 (1918)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Union Pacific R. Co. v. Weld County, 247 U.S. 282 (1918)

Union Pacific Railroad Company v. Weld County

No. 22

Argued November 15, 1916

Decided June 3, 1918

247 U.S. 282

Syllabus

An appeal does not lie to this Court from an order of the circuit court of appeals which merely affirms, on interlocutory appeal, an order of the district court refusing a preliminary injunction, even where the decisions below were rested on the ground of adequate legal remedy, which might have been made the basis for a final dismissal of the bill.

A certiorari may issue under Jud.Code, § 262, to review an interlocutory judgment of the circuit court of appeals which, because the case is of a kind ultimately appealable, is not subject to certiorari under § 240.

Decision of an application for certiorari having been postponed to the hearing of the appeal which was also taken, and the appeal being found without jurisdiction, the certiorari in this case is granted and the record on appeal is treated as the return to the writ.

Equity has jurisdiction to enjoin the collection of illegally discriminatory taxes where the existence of an adequate and complete remedy at law is doubtful.

Where the legal remedy by paying the taxes and suing to recover back necessitates separate actions against several school districts and towns, it will not displace the equitable remedy by injunction in one suit.

Section 5750, Colorado Rev.Stats., 1908, provided a plain, adequate, and complete legal remedy in cases of illegal taxes by requiring the Board of County Commissioners to refund them when paid and by conferring impliedly on the taxpayer a right to recover them though levied for state, school district, and town as well as for county, purposes by one action against the Board; but, in view of later provisions of Laws, 1913, c. 134, § 5, the effect of which has not been determined by the state supreme court and which might be construed as

Page 247 U. S. 283

prohibiting the Board from refunding without the approval of the State Tax Commission and as withdrawing the right of action against the Board where the Commission disapprove, held that the existence of an adequate legal remedy is so uncertain and debatable that jurisdiction in a suit for an injunction could not properly be declined.

217 F. 540, 222 id. 651, reversed.

The case is stated in the opinion.

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.