statute providing that actions by a lessor of a motor vehicle weighing over 6,000 pounds against the state must be commenced within thirty days of payment held not to violate any constitutional rights of the lessor
How later courts described this case
- statute providing that actions by a lessor of a motor vehicle weighing over 6,000 pounds against the state must be commenced within thirty days of payment held not to violate any constitutional rights of the lessor
- relying on M’Culloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316, 4 Wheat. 316, 4 L.Ed. 579 (1819)
- relying on M’Culloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819)
- “The judiciary cannot sit as a super-legislature to determine the wisdom, the necessity, or 8 IN RE: ANNA MARIE J. Decision of the Court the inconvenience of a legislative enactment.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
STEVENS, Judge
(specially concurring).
I concur in the majority opinion in its entirety except for one legal proposition. The majority states that once a suit is filed it would be “unnecessarily onerous” to require the taxpayer to file a new action or a supplemental complaint to protect each monthly protest payment. I find no statutory exemption. To my mind it would be a simple procedure to draft a complaint in such form that a supplement to the complaint could be prepared, served and filed covering each additional payment under protest. The need for this procedure is especially clear if it he that it is not necessary to accompany each payment with a formal protest.