Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
October 24, 1927 [275 U.S. 62, 63] Mr. William Cattron Rigby, of Washington, D. C., for appellant.
Mr. Nelson Gammans, of New York City, for appellee.
Mr. Justice HOLMES delivered the opinion of the court.
This is a bill in equity brought in the District Court of Porto Rico to restrain the collection of taxes imposed by the laws of Porto Rico. An injunction was issued by the District Court, on March 31, 1925. On April 7, 1925, an appeal was allowed to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. That court at first made a decree reversing the decree of the District Court, but later, on December 18, 1926, set that decree aside and transferred the case to this court, under the Act of September 14, 1922, c. 305, 42 Stat. 837 (Comp. St. 1215a), conceiving that the jurisdiction of the District Court was invoked solely upon the ground that the controversy involved the construction or application of the Constitution of the United States. On March 4, 1927, the Act of Congress (48 USCA 872) was passed that took away the jurisdiction of the District Court in this class of cases, as explained in Smallwood v. Gallardo, 275 U.S. 56 , 48 S. Ct. 23.
The case has been argued upon the merits and also upon a motion to remand it to the Circuit Court of Appeals on the ground that the appeal properly was taken to the court. As the only jurisdiction remaining anywhere is to make an order requiring the case to be dismissed for want of jurisdiction we need not discuss these [275 U.S. 62, 64] matters. The decision that no jurisdiction remains comes from this court, and it is proper that it should carry out its decision without unnecessary circuity by directing it to be enforced.
Decree reversed.
Bill to be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Mr. Justice SUTHERLAND was absent.
Was this helpful?
Thank you. Your response has been sent.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Citation: 275 U.S. 62
Docket No: No. 164
Argued: October 05, 1927
Decided: October 05, 1927
Court: United States Supreme Court
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
FindLaw for Legal Professionals
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)