WINONA & ST. PETER LAND COMPANY
v.
MINNESOTA

U.S. | 1895-11-11
Nos. 2; No. 38
159 U.S. 540 Supreme Court of the United States (1895) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 40 L. Ed. 252 · 16 S. Ct. 88 · 1895 U.S. LEXIS 2319 · SCDB 1895-024
Cited by 5 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The Supreme Court dismissed Winona & St. Peter Land Company's appeal challenging Minnesota's taxation of lands granted under federal legislative acts and contracts because the company failed to properly raise its federal constitutional claims—alleging immunity from taxation and violation of due process—in the state courts before appealing to the Supreme Court.

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Opinion of the Court
Mr. Justice Brewer

Mr. Justice Brewer delivered the opinion of the court.

This case is similar to the one between the same parties just decided, in that the questions presented to the state courts involved the taxability of lands included in the legislative grants of May 22, 1857, and March 10, 1862, the Barney contract of October' 31, 1867, and the decree in the United States Circuit Court of March 7, 1887. The tax proceedings were under the law of 1881, but were had in the county of Brown instead of the county of Redwood. The case, however, differs from the preceding, in that the Federal questions sought to be raised in this ,court were not seasonably presented in the state cburts. The alleged immunity from taxation and lack of due process'of law were not “specially set up or claimed ” prior to the decision in the Supreme Court. The failure so to do prevents this court, as has been frequently held, from acquiring jurisdiction. Spies v. Illinois, 123 U. S. 131, 181; Brooks v. Missouri, 124 U. S. 394; Chappell v. Bradshaw, 128 U. S. 132; Brown v. Massachusetts, 144 U. S. 573; Schuyler National Bank v. Bollong, 150 U. S. 85; Powell v. Brunswick County, 150 U. S. 433; Miller v. Texas, 153 U. S. 535; Morrison v. Watson, 154 U. S. 111; Sayward v. Denny, 158 U. S. 180.

The writ of error must, therefore, he dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Weems v. United States, 217 U.S. 349 (U.S. 1910)
  • E. Bldg. C. Ass'n v. Welling, 181 U.S. 47 (U.S. 1901)
    …d assertions that the adverse decision of the Supreme Court of the State was in conflict with several clauses of the Constitution of the United States. But this came too late. Bobb v. Jamison, 155 U. S. 416; Winona & St. Peter Land Co. v. Minnesota, 159 U. S. 540, and cases cited. [*49] The assertion that- although no Federal question was raised below, and although the mind of the state court was not directed to the fact that a right protected by the Constitution of the United States was relied upon, neverth…
  • Taylor v. Drainage Dist. No. Fifty-six of Emmet Cnty., 244 U.S. 644 (U.S. 1917)
    …Per Curiam. Judgment affirmed with costs upon the authority of Huling v. Kaw Valley Railway Improvement Co., 130 U. S. 559; Winona & St. Paul Land Co. v. Minnesota, 159 U. S. 540; Leigh v. Green, 193 U. S. 79; Ballard v. Hunter, 204 U. S. 241, 261, 262; American Land Co. v. Zeiss, 219 U. S. 47.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw