Samuel Freeman Miller

Name: City of Litchfield v. Ballou — Opinion of the Court
Author: Samuel Freeman Miller

City of Litchfield v. Ballou — Opinion of the Court

Summary

“City of Litchfield v. Ballou — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by Samuel Freeman Miller. It explores elements such as bonds, complainants and property.

Quotes from City of Litchfield v. Ballou — Opinion of the Court (Samuel Freeman Miller)

Samuel Freeman Miller, City of Litchfield v. Ballou — Opinion of the Court

“ A lien of a person on his own property, which is and has always been his, in favor of himself, is a novelty which only the necessities of this case could suggest. Another objection to this assertion of a right to the property is that he bondholders, each of whom must hold a part of whatever equity there is to the property, are numerous and scattered, and the relative amount of the interest of each in this property could hardly be correctly ascertained. The property itself cannot be divided; its value consists in its unity as a system of water-works for the city. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, City of Litchfield v. Ballou — Opinion of the Court

“ There is no debt to be secured by a lien. That theory discards the idea of a debt, and pursues the money into the property and seeks the property, not as the property of the city to be sold to pay a debt, but as the property of complainants into which his money, not the city's, has been invested for the reason that there was no debt created by the transaction. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, City of Litchfield v. Ballou — Opinion of the Court

“ Neither the specific money nor any other money is to be found in the safe of the city, or anywhere else under its control. And the decree of the court, so far from attempting to restore the specific money, declares that there is due from the city of Litchfield to complainants a sum of money, not that original money, but a sum equal in amount to the bonds a d interest on them from the day of their issue. Is this a decree to return the identical money or property received, or is it a decree to pay as on an implied contract the sum received, with interest for its use? ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, City of Litchfield v. Ballou — Opinion of the Court

“ If the complainants are after the money they let the city have, they must clearly identify the money or the fund, or other property which represents that money, in such a manner that it can be reclaimed and delivered without taking other property with it, or injuring other persons or interfering with others' rights. It is the consciousness that this cannot be done which caused the court and counsel to resort to the idea of a debt and a lien which cannot be sustained. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, City of Litchfield v. Ballou — Opinion of the Court

“ The complainants, having recovered what was theirs, have no further claim on the city. The latter having dischaged its trust by returning what complainant has elected to claim as his own, is no longer liable for the money or any part of it. But here also the decree departs from what is now asserted to be the principle of the bill. Having decreed an indebtedness where none can exist, and declared that complainant has a lien on, not the ownership of, the water-works, it directs a sale of the water-works for the payment of this debt and the satisfaction of this lien. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, City of Litchfield v. Ballou — Opinion of the Court

“ The holders of the bonds and agents of the city are participes criminis in the act of violating that prohibition, and equity will no more raise a resulting trust in favor of the bondholders than the law will raise an implied assumpsit against a public policy so strongly declared. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, City of Litchfield v. Ballou — Opinion of the Court

“ In this view the present bill fails for want of equitable jurisdiction. (2) But there is no more reason for a recovery on the implied contract to repay the money than on the express contract found in the bonds.
The language of the constitution is that no city, etc., 'shall be allowed to become indebted in any manner or for any purpose to an amount, including existing indebtedness, in the aggregate exceeding five per centum on the value of its taxable property.' It shall not become indebted. Shall not incur any pecuniary liability. ”

Samuel Freeman Miller

Summary

Quotes from City of Litchfield v. Ballou — Opinion of the Court (Samuel Freeman Miller)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature