Gulf Pipe Line Co. v. Correll

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Gulf Pipe Line Co. v. Correll

1928 OK 110, 264 P. 142, 129 Okla. 194, 1928 Okla. LEXIS 382

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedFebruary 14, 1928

Docket17921

StatusPublished

This text of 1928 OK 110 (Gulf Pipe Line Co. v. Correll) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gulf Pipe Line Co. v. Correll, 1928 OK 110, 264 P. 142, 129 Okla. 194, 1928 Okla. LEXIS 382 (Okla. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

MASON, V. C. J.

This action was begun by the plaintiffs in error against the defendants in error, wherein it was alleged that certain items included in the tax levy for Osage county for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1926, and ending June 30, 1927. were excessive, illegal, and void, and praying that the defendants be enjoined from extending said items on the tax rolls and from collecting the taxes there sought to be raised.

The case was tried to the court upon an agreed statement of facts in conjunction with other cases. The court sustained plaintiffs as to some of their contentions and overruled them as to others. Plaintiffs have appealed and the sole question presented is the validity of a levy of 3.4 mills sought to be made for the county highway fund in addition to the 4-mill levy for current expenses, but within the *195 8-mill levy, as limited by tbe Constitution. The trial court found that the levy of 3.4 mills was a legal levy.

It is conceded by both parties that this proceeding was instituted under the provisions of State Question No. 141, Initiative Petition No. 92, being an act regulating the manner of assessing taxes, which was adopted by a vote of the people at the primary election held on August 3, 1926.

Section 3 of said measure authorizes any taxpayer to institute an action of' injunction in the district court to enjoin the spreading upon the records of any illegal or excessive portion Of any levy for taxation. The validity of this act was drawn in issue in the case of Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Long, 122 Okla. 86, 251 Pac. 486, and this court held a portion of said act to be unconstitutional' and the remaining- portion to be' inoperative and the entire act was stricken down.

Inasmuch as plaintiffs concede their action is founded on said act, which has been held unconstitutional, they were not entitled to recover, and the judgment of the trial court in favor of the defendants must be affirmed.

BRANSON, O. J., and PHELPS, LESTER, HUNT, RILEY, CLARK, and HEFNER, JJ., concur.

Note.—See 4 C. J. p. 1120, §3109; 2 R. C. L. p. 277.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MASON, V. C. J.

This action was begun by the plaintiffs in error against the defendants in error, wherein it was alleged that certain items included in the tax levy for Osage county for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1926, and ending June 30, 1927. were excessive, illegal, and void, and praying that the defendants be enjoined from extending said items on the tax rolls and from collecting the taxes there sought to be raised.

The case was tried to the court upon an agreed statement of facts in conjunction with other cases. The court sustained plaintiffs as to some of their contentions and overruled them as to others. Plaintiffs have appealed and the sole question presented is the validity of a levy of 3.4 mills sought to be made for the county highway fund in addition to the 4-mill levy for current expenses, but within the *195 8-mill levy, as limited by tbe Constitution. The trial court found that the levy of 3.4 mills was a legal levy.

It is conceded by both parties that this proceeding was instituted under the provisions of State Question No. 141, Initiative Petition No. 92, being an act regulating the manner of assessing taxes, which was adopted by a vote of the people at the primary election held on August 3, 1926.

Section 3 of said measure authorizes any taxpayer to institute an action of' injunction in the district court to enjoin the spreading upon the records of any illegal or excessive portion Of any levy for taxation. The validity of this act was drawn in issue in the case of Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Long, 122 Okla. 86, 251 Pac. 486, and this court held a portion of said act to be unconstitutional' and the remaining- portion to be' inoperative and the entire act was stricken down.

Inasmuch as plaintiffs concede their action is founded on said act, which has been held unconstitutional, they were not entitled to recover, and the judgment of the trial court in favor of the defendants must be affirmed.

BRANSON, O. J., and PHELPS, LESTER, HUNT, RILEY, CLARK, and HEFNER, JJ., concur.

Note.—See 4 C. J. p. 1120, §3109; 2 R. C. L. p. 277.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1928 OK 110, 264 P. 142, 129 Okla. 194, 1928 Okla. LEXIS 382, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gulf-pipe-line-co-v-correll-okla-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack