The Meeker herald., 1888-06-02

ing with the County Commissioners an
application for the purpose, which was
ignored and not acted upon by the
Board of Equnlika,ioni that lie was un'
justly charged with the sum of si,2ls.5
upon his property IN said county fo,
said year 1851, but on account Of omit
ting property Of other persons Liable Ia
taxation from assessment, he does not
know what the amount OF his Just taxes
are; that he has always been able and
willing 10 pay the just amount.
The complaint charges further tina,
the said Breeze. Treasurer, WAS then
about 10 make distralnt and sale OF the
plaintiffs cattle and personal property
Ia enforce payment ot said sum OF
si,2is,jp.
III. prayer Of the complaint is that
said County Treasurer be restrained by
injunction from making distress and
sale Of the said cattle, horses and other
property of the plaintiff. and tia, II lie
had already made distress that hc be
restrained from proceeding: any farther
.hi4h HssA' VI 'AiA'A
disposition of the personal property un.
Ill the further order o, the court from
taking any further steps 10 collect the
taxes aforesaid, and that on final hear
Ing the injunction be made perpetual;
aud Tor such other aud further relief as
equity and good sonsel.ncc may require.
4 temporary injunction In accordance
with ,hc prayer of the bill WAS granted
December :, 1855.
Subselucn,ly-on July |, isST-sald
Haley iiled In the District Court Of Pit
kin county the complaint in til. present
ease prayin: injunciiyc relief against
the collection of III. same taxes, aud
that the sam. officer, III. appellant here
and property 10 satisfy said taxes. Tn.
same objections aTc therein alleged tia,
he WIS assessed for more property than
Il. owned Ia Rou,t county; that tile val
uniion Was too great, ani iha; tho as-
scSsnrnt and levy of the taxes uI-nn his
property We're invalid. iof various toa-
son, alleged. some Of which had not
been stated In the complaint nl-L in III.
former action. lie also ay-f-d other
Items Of damage which would r-sul, 10
him from a sale oi his cattle. and other
alleged equities than those previously
mentioned. This complaint oml,s 10
mention several facts stated In the for.
m-r complaint. as the quantity and
value of land. and the number and
value of horses md cattle owned b,
him in iioutt county ia the year issi.
III. only relief prayed in III. hili is
,la, ,hs arlsl!an,, and hlP hsRi'fs,st,c..
ing and selling any O: his stock Tot Tie
said taxes.
tpon tic hlipg of this bill nh iniunc-
ton was ordered 10 issue according Ia
the prayer thereof. The appellant nn-
swcr-,l July -. aycTrins, among other
things. that ,hc validity of the taxes
complained o. had been tnlly adIudi-
Gated and established la prior suit he
tween the nA;nr parties. involving the
same l,sti-s mentioned In IL, Injunction
suit Instituted In the District Court oi
Clear Creek county. settling out the
complaint filed therein hy said Haley.
the STEPS taken therein, the Judgment
of this court sustaining the validity Uf
tn. assessment. and intefpps!ns the
former adjudication rs n cOmp!-,. bar
to this second action.
Upon III. iiline of this answer appel.
Ian, moved to dissolve III. temporary
injunction. This motion was heard by
the District, Judge nj chambers on the
18th day Of July. upon the plcadings and
proofs OF the respective PARTIES, and de-
nicl. from which order deny ing the ap-
plication To dissolve this a!lcai Is proa-
ccuici.
Other facts are stated In tie opinion.
heck, &. j.:
The record liscloscs that the appellee.
Haley. has instituted and prosecuted
two INJUNCTION suits against the appel
liant for accomplishment OF the same
purpose. to-wit: TO prevent him from
enforcing. as County Treasurer OF
Rout, county. the collection Of taxes as.
sessed against the personal property Of
the appellee therein ior the wear iss! 10y
dlsiraint and sale of a portion of the
same. The first suit was brought and
prosecuted In the District Court OF
Clear Creek county. and the present nc
ton In the District Court OF Pitkin
county. The complaint Ia the former
case stated substantially the same
grounds for cnjoiniug the collection OF
these taxes rs that filed In the latter
case. the principal ground being tile in
validity of the assessment. Additional
grounds for equitable relief are alleged
in the present complaint. but they NIL
existed nj the time of the former ne
ton. and it is not even alleged that they
were unknown 10 the appellee Mt the
time the original suit was pending. The
doctrine of the authorities is that when
complainant in equity brings his suit
he must present 10 the court all the
grounds then existing for its support.
He is not at liberty TO present portion
Of the grounds upon which his claim
for equitable relief depends in one suit,
and IL that tail. To present the rest in
another action. The former adjudica-
ton is held 10 he conclusive In "a subsc.
qucnt proceeding between the same
parties As to every matter properly in
volved, and which might have been