Opinion

Bass v. Alderman

  • 80 Fla. 345
  • 86 So. 244
Court
Supreme Court of Florida
Filed
Jul 29, 1920
Status
Published
Author
Whitfield
On the bench
Browne, Ellis, Taylor, West, Whitfield
Cited by
4 cases
Authority
More cited than 18.9%

The opinion

Whitfield, J.,

dissenting. — A court of equity should not entertain a bill for an injunction against a tax collector who threatens to seize and sell personal property for the non-payment of taxes, except in rare cases, where the property is peculiarly valuable and cannot be compensated adequately in damages. This is true, even if the officer is acting without lawful authority, as such seizure is a mere- trespass, remedial by. action at law. Where an injunction is prayed on the ground of irreparable injury, the bill of complaint should allege facts to enable the court to determine whether the.injury will be irreparable. A mere general allegation that the injury will be irreparable is not sufficient. When the facts alleged do not show that irreparable injury will be sustained, an injunction should be granted. H. W. Metcalf Co. v. Martin, 54 Fla.. 531, 45 South. Rep. 463 , 127 Am. St. *352 Rep. 149 . See also Bryan v. Long, 14 Fla. 366 ; Baldwin v. Tucker, 16 Fla. 258 ; Crawford v. Bradford, 23 Fla. 404 , 2 South. Rep. 782 ; Odlin v. Woodruff, 31 Fla. 160 , 12 South. Rep. 227 ; City of Jacksonville v. Massey Business College, 47 Fla. 339 , 36 South. Rep. 432 ; Florida Packing & Ice Co. v. Carney, 49 Fla. 293 , 38 South. Rep. 602 ; Williams v. Peeples, 48 Fla. 316 , 37 South. Rep. 572 ; Hendry v. Whidden, 48 Fla. 268 , 37 South. Rep. 571 ; Wordehoff v. Evers, 18 Fla. 339 ; Finnegan v. City of Fernandina, 15 Fla. 379 ; King v. Gwynn, 14 Fla. 32 ; Town of Orange City v. Thayer, 45 Fla. 502 , 34 South. Rep. 573 ; Singer Sewing Mach. Co. of New Jersey v. Benedict, 229 U. S. 481 , 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 942; Bismarck Water, Supply Co. v. Barnes, 30 N. D. 555 , 153 N. W. Rep. 454 , L. R. A. 1916-A 965 and notes.-

The allegations as to the peculiar nature and value of the range cattle and of the difficulty of distinguishing separate ownerships of cattle bearing complainant’s marks and brands do not show that an irreparable injury would result from a tax sale any more than 'from a voluntary sale of portions of the range cattle. 'Fraud is not shown. . , ■

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.