London v. Day
LONDON Et Al. v. DAY
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
PER CURTAM.
This cause presents error from the superior court of Pottawatomie county, and grows out of the action of the State Board of Equalization in raising the assessed value of real estate in said county 50 per cent, over and above the amount fixed by the county board of equalization for the year 1911. The defendant in error, plaintiff below, filed his action to enjoin the plaintiffs in error, being the board of county commissioners, treasurer, and sheriff, from collecting so much of the taxes on the real property of the defendant in error as was caused by the said raise. So far as the merits of the case and the remedy are concerned, they have been settled in this court, directly and in principle in a number of decisions wherein the same and kindred questions were involved, and it would be a useless labor to review what we have there- said. See Williams v. Garfield Exchange Bank, post, 134 Pac. 863 ;
Rumph, Treasurer, v. Joines, ante, 131 Pac. 1095 ;
In re McNeal, 35 Okla. 17 , 128 Pac. 285 ;
In re *429 Western Union Telegraph Co., 29 Okla. 483 , 118 Pac. 376 ;
Board of Corners of Kingfisher County v. Guarantee State Bank et al., 27 Okla. 736 , 117 Pac. 216 ;
Asher State Bank v. Board of Com’rs of Pottawatomie County, 31 Okla. 145 , 120 Pac. 634 .
In addition, however, plaintiff assails the constitutionality of the act of the Legislature under which the foregoing opinions have been rendered. Chapter 87, Sess. Laws 1910. We have examined the contentions made in this regard, but deem them to be without merit.
The judgment of the trial court is therefore reversed, and the cause is remanded, with instructions to dismiss it.
TURNER and WILLIAM'S, JJ., dissent.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.