Knowledge (XXG)

Findlay v. McAllister

Source 📝

253:
their confederates did pledge themselves to contribute of their means and influence, and to protect each other in all efforts made, to resist the payment thereof. In furtherance of their design, the defendants and their confederates, members of said association, made and published threats of violence against the attorneys of the plaintiff, who were employed to represent him in the collection of his judgment, and gave out and circulated the threat that no person would be allowed to bid upon or purchase any property that might be offered for sale by the collector to enforce the payment of the special tax, intending thereby to intimidate any person from bidding upon or purchasing any property offered for sale by the collector for the payment thereof. To induce the tax-payers of the county to join the association and aid in carrying out their unlawful conspiracy, the defendants and their confederates falsely and fraudulently gave out and published that such bonds and special tax were illegal, null, and void, and that they were under no obligation, legal or moral, to pay the same, well knowing that such declarations were false.
257:
levied on, and prevent the payment of the plaintiff's judgment, and so to harass and wrong him as to induce him to compromise his judgment and bonds at much less than their value, assembled in vast numbers at the time and place advertised for the sale, and, by their combined influence, threats, and hostile demonstrations, did so overawe and intimidate the persons who had gone to the place of sale, for the purpose of and with intent to bid on the property, as to prevent them from bidding when the same was offered for sale; and, by reason of such combined influence, threats, and menaces, the defendants and their confederates, members of said association, acting under its orders, did prevent any person from bidding on the property when so offered for sale, and did prevent it from being sold.
31: 274:
decide that a citizen might be subjected to a willful and malicious injury at the hands of private persons without redress; that an organized band of conspirators could, without subjecting themselves to any liability, fraudulently and maliciously obstruct and defeat the process of the courts, issued for the satisfaction of the judgment of a private suitor, and thus render the judgment nugatory and worthless. Such a conclusion would be contrary to the principles of the common law and of right and justice.
278:
plaintiff's complaint is that the defendants have obstructed, and continue to obstruct, the collection of his judgment, and he avers that he has been damaged thereby to the amount of his judgment and interest; in other words, that by reason of the unlawful and malicious conduct of the defendants, his judgment has been rendered worthless. To reply to this that the judgment still remains in force on the records of the court is an inadequate answer to the plaintiff's cause of action.
261:
overawed and intimidated, and so influenced that they do not pay the special tax, nor has the collector, by reason of said combination and association, been able to collect the same. The plaintiff, by reason of the premises, has been damaged to the amount of his judgment, to-wit, $ 4,008.86, with interest thereon from September 25, 1877, and costs; for which, with $ 3,000 exemplary damages, he demands judgment against the defendants.
256:
During the month of February, 1878, the collector of the county levied upon a large number of horses and mules, and advertised them to be sold on February 28, 1878, at Memphis, in said county of Scotland; whereupon the defendants and their confederates, in order to prevent the sale of the property so
277:
It is no answer to the case made by the petition to say, as the defendant, by his counsel, does, that the judgment of the plaintiff is still in force and bearing interest, and the liability of the county still remains undisturbed. What is a judgment worth that cannot be enforced? The gravamen of the
252:
The defendants and their confederates organized into an association called 'The Tax-payers Association of Scotland County,' with branch organizations in various school-districts of the county, for the purpose, among other things, of resisting the collection of the special tax, and the defendants and
264:
The defendants demurred to the petition. In support of their demurrer they assigned and argued, both in the circuit court and this court, the following grounds: (1) That the plaintiff had no such legal property interest in the taxes in question as to entitle him to maintain actions for conspiracy;
260:
The unlawful combination and conspiracy of the defendants, to injure and defraud the plaintiff, and prevent the collection of his judgment, still exists; and, by reason of the combined influence, threats, menaces, and hostile demonstrations of the defendants, the tax-payers of Scotland county are
273:
It was found that the plaintiff could not sue the collector; for he has done his duty, and no suit lies against him. Unless the plaintiff has a cause of action against the defendants, he is without remedy. To hold that the facts of this case do not give a cause of action against them would be to
214:, which were recovered on September 25, 1877 in the same circuit court where action was brought, with a judgment on the coupons against the county in the amount of $ 4,008.86. The county failed to pay the judgment, so the circuit court issued a peremptory 222:
and cause to be collected a special tax on all taxable property within the county in order to pay the judgment, including interest as well as other costs. This was also ordered for several other plaintiffs in like circumstances.
265:(2) that he had sustained no legal damages by the alleged acts of the defendants. The court sustained the demurrer, and rendered a judgment for the defendants, to reverse which the plaintiff brings this writ of error. 433: 237:
persons, all residents of Scotland county, conspired to hinder and prevent the county court and the collector from collecting and paying the special tax. They did this in order to try and
226:
The county court levied a special tax, called a 'judgment tax,' with an amount sufficient to pay off all the judgments, and placed it on the books of the county to be delivered to the
453: 372: 344: 321: 72: 241:
the value of the bonds held by the plaintiff in an attempt to compromise the judgment and bonds at much less than their value. This was done unlawfully and maliciously, and in
438: 428: 233:
After the special tax had been levied, and the tax-book placed in the hands of the collector for collection, the defendants, with about 2,000 other
285:
to the petition. Its judgment was reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings in conformity with this opinion; and it was so ordered.
443: 448: 35: 306: 314: 211: 191: 138: 281:
From the views expressed by the higher court, it was determined that the circuit court erred in sustaining the
410: 246: 376: 348: 293: 289: 130: 114: 106: 64: 227: 126: 383: 392: 234: 150: 118: 215: 401: 351: 219: 98: 422: 67: 142: 238: 203: 282: 242: 207: 187: 79: 167:
Woods, joined by Waite, Bradley, Harlan, Matthews, Gray, Blatchford
318:: Supreme Court case on defaulted municipal bonds form Illinois 30: 310:: Supreme Court case on defaulted municipal bonds from Iowa 194:
and 14 other defendants, to recover damages as follows:
322:
List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 113
434:
United States Supreme Court cases of the Waite Court
171: 163: 158: 87: 59: 49: 42: 23: 8: 454:Government bonds issued by the United States 20: 333: 218:, which commanded the county court to 18:1885 United States Supreme Court case 7: 36:Supreme Court of the United States 14: 439:United States securities case law 429:United States Supreme Court cases 379:104 (1885) is available from: 175:Miller, Field (without opinions) 29: 444:1885 in United States case law 307:Ackley School District v. Hall 1: 186:, 113 U.S. 104 (1885), was a 230:for collection of the tax. 470: 43:Submitted December 2, 1884 449:Scotland County, Missouri 315:City of Quincy v. Jackson 212:Scotland County, Missouri 92: 28: 45:Decided January 12, 1885 249:of the circuit court. 369:Findlay v. McAllister 341:Findlay v. McAllister 183:Findlay v. McAllister 54:Findlay v. McAllister 24:Findlay v. McAllister 228:county tax collector 411:Library of Congress 206:, owned bonds with 245:of the orders and 103:Associate Justices 192:Thomas McAllister 179: 178: 151:Samuel Blatchford 119:Joseph P. Bradley 78:5 S. Ct. 401; 28 461: 415: 409: 406: 400: 397: 391: 388: 382: 355: 338: 216:writ of mandamus 190:brought against 139:Stanley Matthews 131:William B. Woods 115:Stephen J. Field 107:Samuel F. Miller 88:Court membership 33: 32: 21: 469: 468: 464: 463: 462: 460: 459: 458: 419: 418: 413: 407: 404: 398: 395: 389: 386: 380: 364: 359: 358: 339: 335: 330: 302: 271: 200: 141: 129: 117: 83: 44: 38: 19: 12: 11: 5: 467: 465: 457: 456: 451: 446: 441: 436: 431: 421: 420: 417: 416: 393:Google Scholar 363: 362:External links 360: 357: 356: 332: 331: 329: 326: 325: 324: 319: 311: 301: 298: 270: 267: 199: 196: 177: 176: 173: 169: 168: 165: 161: 160: 156: 155: 154: 153: 127:John M. Harlan 104: 101: 99:Morrison Waite 96: 90: 89: 85: 84: 77: 61: 57: 56: 51: 50:Full case name 47: 46: 40: 39: 34: 26: 25: 17: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 466: 455: 452: 450: 447: 445: 442: 440: 437: 435: 432: 430: 427: 426: 424: 412: 403: 394: 385: 384:CourtListener 378: 374: 370: 366: 365: 361: 353: 350: 346: 342: 337: 334: 327: 323: 320: 317: 316: 312: 309: 308: 304: 303: 299: 297: 295: 291: 286: 284: 279: 275: 268: 266: 262: 258: 254: 250: 248: 244: 240: 236: 235:evil-disposed 231: 229: 224: 221: 217: 213: 209: 205: 202:Findlay, the 197: 195: 193: 189: 185: 184: 174: 170: 166: 162: 159:Case opinions 157: 152: 148: 144: 140: 136: 132: 128: 124: 120: 116: 112: 108: 105: 102: 100: 97: 95:Chief Justice 94: 93: 91: 86: 81: 75: 74: 69: 66: 62: 58: 55: 52: 48: 41: 37: 27: 22: 16: 368: 354: (1885). 340: 336: 313: 305: 287: 280: 276: 272: 263: 259: 255: 251: 232: 225: 201: 182: 181: 180: 146: 134: 122: 110: 71: 53: 15: 296:dissented. 143:Horace Gray 423:Categories 328:References 239:depreciate 210:issued by 198:Background 288:Justices 204:plaintiff 60:Citations 367:Text of 300:See also 283:demurrer 269:Decision 247:mandates 243:contempt 164:Majority 208:coupons 172:Dissent 414:  408:  405:  402:Justia 399:  396:  390:  387:  381:  343:, 290:Miller 149: 147:· 145:  137: 135:· 133:  125: 123:· 121:  113: 111:· 109:  80:L. Ed. 375: 347: 294:Field 377:U.S. 349:U.S. 292:and 220:levy 188:suit 73:more 65:U.S. 63:113 373:113 352:104 345:113 82:930 68:104 425:: 371:, 76:) 70:(

Index

Supreme Court of the United States
U.S.
104
more
L. Ed.
Morrison Waite
Samuel F. Miller
Stephen J. Field
Joseph P. Bradley
John M. Harlan
William B. Woods
Stanley Matthews
Horace Gray
Samuel Blatchford
suit
Thomas McAllister
plaintiff
coupons
Scotland County, Missouri
writ of mandamus
levy
county tax collector
evil-disposed
depreciate
contempt
mandates
demurrer
Miller
Field
Ackley School District v. Hall

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.