Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

46 W. Va. 128

State v. Swann

West Virginia Supreme Court

Decided March 25, 1899

West Virginia Supreme Court · decided 1899-03-25

<p>1. DxJE Pr-ocess of ^aw — Taxation—Forfeiture—Constitutional Law.</p> <p>Section 6 of Art. XIII of the Constitution of this State, providing for the forfeiture of lands for the nonentry thereof for five successive years after the year 1869, is not in violation of the fourteenth amendment of the constitution, restraining states from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. (p. 132, 137).</p> <p>2. Constitutional Law — Taxation—Forfeiture—Non-entry.</p> <p>Although said section of the Constitution provides for the forfeiture of lands containing one thousand acres or more, it does not limit such forfeiture to tracts of land of one thousand acres or more in quantity; and the act of 1873, providing for the forfeiture of a less number of acres than one thousand, for nonentry upon the land books, is merely cumulative, and not inhibited by said section of the Constitution, (p. 133, 134).</p> <p>3. Taxation — Forfeiture—Non-entry.</p> <p>In such cases failure to enter and pay taxes due on land for five successive years, as required by statute, caused the forfeiture of such land to become complete and absolute, and no inquisition, judicial proceeding', or inquest or finding-of any kind was necessary to consummate such forfeiture, (p. 136).</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1899-03-25

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently July 1966

9 state decisions

6018991900191019201930194019501960decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

BraNNON, Judge,

¶1{dissenting):

¶2I think that all acts since the Constitution of 1872, forfeiting tracts less than one thousand acres for nonentry are unconstitutional, for reasons given in Industrial Co. v. Schultz, 43, W. Va. 470, (27 S. E. 255). At its adoption the act of 1869 forfeited such tracts for past and future omission. Did it not repeal that act so that no forfeiture of those tracts could take place under it in future, and prohibit new acts doing so? If that act was repealed by it, how could a new act be any more valid?

¶3Afirmed.

/46/wva/128 · .json · Public domain