Citation network
King Vs. Mullins
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 31, 1898
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 404 (1898) U.S. Supreme Court King v. MullinsSearch
-
U.S. 404 (1898) King v. MullinsSearch
-
it forfeited lands which the owner failed to have put on the proper land books and pay taxes upon, was Staat's Lessee v. BoardSearch
-
Page 171 U. S. 413 The same principle was announced in Wild's Lessee v. SerpellSearch
-
which have been made during the present term of this Court in cases arising under these several statutes. Staats v. BoardSearch
-
Smith's Lessee v. ChapmanSearch
-
This case was cited in Armstrong v. MorrillSearch
-
to the prohibition in that amendment against the deprivation of property without due process of law. In Levasser v. WashburnSearch
-
According to the decisions of this court in the cases just referred to, and also in the cases of Wild v. SerpellSearch
-
Gratt. 405, and Smith's Lessee v. ChapmanSearch
-
Usher's Heirs v. PrideSearch
-
Gratt. 190, and Smith v. TharpSearch
-
Gratt. 221. In this connection, it may be well to refer to Martin v. SnowdenSearch
-
was not then in use, either in England or the states, as a mode of collecting the tax. Referring to Murray's Lessee v. HobokenSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
The case of Martin v. SnowdenSearch
-
was brought here, and is reported under the title of Bennett v. HunterSearch
-
so highly penal is not to be inferred from language capable of any milder construction. Fairfax's Devisee v. Hunter'sSearch
-
Virginia in relation to the forfeiture of lands, the Supreme Court of Appeals of that state had occasion, in McClure v. MaitlandSearch
-
citing Staats v. BoardSearch
-
Wild's Lessee v. SerpellSearch
-
Levasser v. WashburnSearch
-
Usher v. PrideSearch
-
W.Va. 221. So, in Coal Co. v. HowellSearch
-
authorities have Page 171 U. S. 421 been cited by the plaintiff, those most directly in point being Griffin v. MixonSearch
-
Miss. 424 (1860), and Marshall v. McDanielSearch
-
Gaines v. BufordSearch
-
that could not be applied in cases of a judicial character. This subject was fully considered in Murray's Lessee v. HobokenSearch
-
Hoke v. HendersonSearch
-
Taylor v. PorterSearch
-
Van Zandt v. WaddelSearch
-
State Bank v. CooperSearch
-
Jones' Heirs v. PerrySearch
-
Greene v. BriggsSearch
-
In Bell's Gap Railroad v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
of taxes. In this connection, reference may be made to what was said by the Supreme Court of Appeals in McClure v. MaitlandSearch
-
that the unconditional title is in the state, for unless such is the fact, neither has any authority to act. Twiggs v. ChevallieSearch
-
of his failure to place them on the proper land books. An answer to this view is that what was said in McClure v. MaitlandSearch
-
Acts 1872-73, p. 449, c. 134, which were not judicial in their nature, but administrative. But as declared in Hays v. Camden'sSearch
-
and effect a redemption of their lands from forfeiture, a judicial proceeding. This view was reaffirmed in Wiant v. HaysSearch
-
Page 171 U. S. 433 delivering the unanimous judgment of the state court, observed that what was said in McClure v. MaitlandSearch
-
see -- a suit under a special statute, it is true, but nonetheless a suit. So, substantially, it was regarded in Hays v. Camden'sSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court King v. MullinsSearch
-
Staat's Lessee v. BoardSearch
-
Staats v. BoardSearch
-
In Levasser v. WashburnSearch
-
of Wild v. SerpellSearch
-
and Smith's Lessee v. ChapmanSearch
-
Usher's Heirs v. PrideSearch
-
and Smith v. TharpSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial