FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   644   645   646   647   648   649   650   651   652   653   654   655   656   657   658   659   660   661   662   663   664   665   666   667   668  
669   670   671   672   673   674   675   676   677   678   679   680   681   682   683   684   685   686   687   688   689   690   691   692   693   >>   >|  
parties,[153] nor can a county auditor contest the validity of a statute even though he is charged with its enforcement,[154] nor can directors of an irrigation district occupy a position antagonistic to it.[155] It is a well settled rule that: "The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of legislation * * *, or upon the complaint of one who fails to show that he is injured by its operation, * * *"[156] It is equally well established as a corollary that, "litigants may challenge the constitutionality of a statute only insofar as it affects them."[157] STOCKHOLDERS' SUITS It must be noted, however, that adversity is a relative element which the courts may or may not discover. Thus in Pollock _v._ Farmers' Loan and Trust Co.,[158] the Supreme Court sustained the jurisdiction of a district court which had enjoined the company from paying an income tax even though the suit was brought by a stockholder against the company, thereby circumventing section 3224 of the Revised Statutes, which forbids the maintenance in any court of a suit "for the purpose of restraining the collection of any tax."[159] Subsequently the Court has found adversity of parties in a suit brought by a stockholder to restrain a title company from investing its funds in farm loan bonds issued by the federal land banks,[160] and in a suit brought by certain preferred stockholders against the Alabama Power Company and the TVA to enjoin the performance of contracts between the company and the authority and a subsidiary, the Electric Home and Farm Authority, on the ground that the act creating these agencies was unconstitutional.[161] The ability to find adversity in narrow crevices of casual disagreement is well illustrated by Carter _v._ Carter Coal Co.,[162] where the President of the company brought suit against the company and its officials, among whom was Carter's father who was Vice President of the Company.[163] The Court entertained the suit and decided the case on its merits. SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST DOCTRINE Equally important as an essential element of a case is the concept of real or substantial interests. As a general rule the interest of taxpayers in the general funds of the federal Treasury is insufficient to give them a standing in court to contest the expenditure of public funds on the ground that this interest "is shared with millions of others; is comparatively minute and indeterminable; and the effect upon future taxation
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   644   645   646   647   648   649   650   651   652   653   654   655   656   657   658   659   660   661   662   663   664   665   666   667   668  
669   670   671   672   673   674   675   676   677   678   679   680   681   682   683   684   685   686   687   688   689   690   691   692   693   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
company
 

brought

 
Carter
 

adversity

 
interest
 

general

 

ground

 
Company
 

federal

 

stockholder


President
 

element

 

statute

 

contest

 

district

 
constitutionality
 

parties

 
indeterminable
 
stockholders
 

agencies


Alabama

 

preferred

 

minute

 

unconstitutional

 

creating

 

ability

 

contracts

 

authority

 

performance

 

taxation


enjoin
 

subsidiary

 

Electric

 
future
 

effect

 

Authority

 

comparatively

 

disagreement

 
merits
 
SUBSTANTIAL

INTEREST

 

DOCTRINE

 
entertained
 

decided

 

Equally

 

insufficient

 

interests

 

Treasury

 

substantial

 

important