FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   686   687   688   689   690   691   692   693   694   695   696   697   698   699   700   701   702   703   704   705   706   707   708   709   710  
711   712   713   714   715   716   717   718   719   720   721   722   723   724   725   726   727   728   729   730   731   732   733   734   735   >>   >|  
omplainant State must show that it "has suffered a wrong through the action of the other State, furnishing ground for judicial redress, or is asserting a right against the other State which is susceptible of judicial enforcement according to * * * the common law or equity systems of jurisprudence."[472] The fact that the trust property was sufficient to satisfy the claims of both States and that recovery by either would not impair any rights of the other distinguished the case from Texas _v._ Florida,[473] where the contrary situation obtained. Furthermore, the Missouri statute providing for reciprocal privileges in levying inheritance taxes did not confer upon Massachusetts any contractual right. The Court then proceeded to reiterate its earlier rule that a State may not invoke the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court for the benefit of its residents or to enforce the individual rights of its citizens.[474] Moreover, Massachusetts could not invoke the original jurisdiction of the Court by the expedient of making citizens of Missouri parties to a suit not otherwise maintainable.[475] Accordingly, Massachusetts was held not to be without an adequate remedy in Missouri's courts or in a federal district court in Missouri.[476] THE PROBLEM OF ENFORCEMENT; VIRGINIA _v._ WEST VIRGINIA A very important issue that presents itself in interstate litigation is the enforcement of the Court's decree, once it has been entered. In some types of suits, as Charles Warren has indicated, this issue may not arise; and if it does, it may be easily met. Thus a judgment putting a State in possession of disputed territory is ordinarily self-executing. But if the losing State should oppose execution, refractory State officials, as individuals, would be liable to civil suits or criminal prosecutions in the federal courts. Likewise an injunction decree may be enforced against State officials as individuals by civil or criminal proceedings. Those judgments, on the other hand, which require a State in its governmental capacity to perform some positive act present the issue of enforcement in more serious form. The issue arose directly in the long and much litigated case between Virginia and West Virginia over the proportion of the State debt of original Virginia owed by West Virginia after its separate admission to the Union under a compact which provided that West Virginia assume a share of the debt. The suit was begun in 1906, and a jud
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   686   687   688   689   690   691   692   693   694   695   696   697   698   699   700   701   702   703   704   705   706   707   708   709   710  
711   712   713   714   715   716   717   718   719   720   721   722   723   724   725   726   727   728   729   730   731   732   733   734   735   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
Virginia
 

Missouri

 

Massachusetts

 

original

 

enforcement

 

federal

 
citizens
 

jurisdiction

 

individuals

 

officials


invoke
 

criminal

 

VIRGINIA

 
decree
 
rights
 
judicial
 

courts

 
ordinarily
 

litigation

 

presents


interstate

 

territory

 

executing

 

possession

 

Warren

 
Charles
 

entered

 
easily
 

putting

 

judgment


disputed

 

judgments

 

proportion

 

litigated

 
directly
 

separate

 
admission
 

assume

 

provided

 

compact


Likewise

 

injunction

 

enforced

 
proceedings
 

prosecutions

 
liable
 
oppose
 

execution

 
refractory
 
positive