Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

Summary

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. Paine Lumber Company v. Neal — Dissent

The Constitution of the United States does not declare in terms that infringements of the rights thereby secured may be prevented by injunction. Ordinarily they may not be. It is only where a threatened infringement will produce injury and damage for which the law can afford no remedy such, for instance, as irreparable and continuing damage, or a multiplicity of suits-that resort may be had to equity; and when this does appear, the right to an injunction arises because that is the only appropriate relief.
Source: Wikisource

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. Paine Lumber Company v. Neal — Dissent

So, tax laws rarely, if ever, contain express authorization of an injunction to restrain illegal taxes. And a suit in equity will not lie on the mere ground that a tax is illegal. But if, in addition, enforcement of the tax would lead to a multiplicity of suits, or produce irreparable injury, or if the property taxed is real estate and the tax throws a cloud upon the title, equity will interfere by injunction.
Source: Wikisource

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. Paine Lumber Company v. Neal — Dissent

Section 1 of the Sherman Act declares that every combination or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce among the several states or with foreign nations is illegal, and imposes a punishment of fine or imprisonment upon the guilty parties. It clearly recognizes, what is well known, that injury to other traders and competitors is the primary effect of such a combination.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature