Poindexter v. Greenhow, Treasurer, Etc. In Error to the Hustings
Opinion
114 U.S. 269 5 S.Ct. 962 114 U.S. 330 29 L.Ed. 207
POINDEXTER v. GREENHOW, Treasurer, etc. In Error to the Hustings
Court of the City of Richmond, State of Virginia.
WHITE 1
v.
SAME.
CARTER 2
v.
SAME.
3
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United 4
States for the Eastern District of Virginia.
ALLEN, Auditor, etc., and others 5
v. 6
BALTIMORE & O.R. CO. Appeal from the Circuit Court of 7
the United States for the Western District of Virginia.
PLEASANTS 8
v. 9
GREENHOW, Treasurer, etc. Appeal from the Circuit Court 10
of the United States for the Eastern District 11
of Virginia.
CHAFFIN 12
v. 13
TAYLOR. In Error to the Supreme Court of Appeals of 14
the State of Virginia.
MARYE, Auditor, etc., and others 15
v. 16
PARSONS. Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United 17
States for the Eastern District of Virginia.
18
April 20, 1885.
19
There were eight of these cases. All related to the legislation of the State of Virginia of March 30, 1871, authorizing coupons of the funded debt of the State to be received in payment of taxes, debts, dues, and demands due the State, and to subsequent legislation, practically forbidding the receipt of the coupons in present payment of dues and taxes. court. The legislation is set forth, or referred to in Antoni v. Greenhow, 107 U.S. 769 , and in the opinion of the court in the first of the present cases.
20
The cases were argued, or submitted, in the following order: PLEASANTS v. GREENHOW,, was submitted December 1, 1884. POINDEXTER v. GREENHOW; WHITE v. GREENHOW; CHAFFIN v. TAYLOR; CARTER v. GREENHOW; and MOORE v. GREENHOW, were argued together March 20, 23, 24 and 25, 1885. ALLEN v. BALTIMORE & OHIO RAILROAD CO. was argued March 25, 26, 1885; and MARYE v. PARSONS was argued March 26, 27, 1885.
21
The opinions and judgments of the court in all the cases except MOORE v. GREENHOW were announced April 20, 1885. In the later case they were announced May 4, 1885.
22
The dissenting opinion will be found after the opinion of the court in MARYE v. PARSONS. The Justices who concurred in it dissented from the judgments and opinions of the court in POINDEXTER v. GREENHOW; WHITE v. GREENHOW; CHAFFIN v. TAYLOR; and ALLEN v. BALTIMORE & OHIO RAILROAD CO. In PLEASANTS v. GREENHOW; CARTER v. GREENHOW; and MARYE v. PARSONS, they concurred in the judgments of the court, but rested their concurrence on the reasons given in their dissenting opinion.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 3 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(permitting injunctions, restitution, and damages against state officers who seized property to collect taxes already paid with interest coupons the State had agreed to accept)
-
(“[O]fficers have no power but what the state gives them. They act for and on behalf of the state, and in no other way.”)
Cited by 32 cases
View all citing references →- U.S. Supreme Court11
- U.S. Courts of Appeals5
- Federal District Courts1
- Federal Specialty Courts1
- Historical Federal Courts2
- State Highest Courts10
- State Appellate Courts2
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.