Arkansas ex rel. Utley v. St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co.
269 U.S. 172 (1925)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Arkansas ex rel. Utley v. St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co., 269 U.S. 172 (1925)

Arkansas ex rel. Utley v. St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company

No. 74

Argued October 22, 1925

Decided November 16, 1925

269 U.S. 172

Syllabus

1. A mandamus issued by the federal district court for the purpose of satisfying a judgment previously entered therein against a county, and commanding tax officials to assess all property in the county at its full value and continue so doing until the judgment shall be paid, but laying down no further details as to the manner of making assessments, is to be taken as requiring that they be made in accordance with the laws of the state, leaving the question whether an assessment, when made, complies with those laws to be determined in appropriate proceedings by that court or by the state courts. P. 269 U. S. 174.

2. Hence, where, in purported compliance with such mandamus, the property in the county was assessed at full value for county taxes (out of which the federal court judgment was to be paid), but at one-half its value for state, municipal, and school taxes, and the state supreme court, adjudging that the discrepancy was contrary to uniformity requirement of the state constitution and not in accord with the direction of the federal court, refused to enforce collection of the county taxes for more than 50%, held that the judgment of the state court plainly did not deny the authority or question the validity of the mandamus of the federal court, and was not reviewable in this Court under § 237, Jud.Code. P. 269 U. S. 176.

Writ of error to review 162 Ark. 43 dismissed.

Error to a judgment of the Supreme Court of Arkansas affirming judgments for less than the amounts sought in actions by a county to collect taxes assessed against the St. Louis-San Francisco Railroad Company and the Missouri Pacific Railway Company.

Page 269 U. S. 173

Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law 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.