Newman Estate, In re., 75 Cal. 213, 16 Pac. 887. Neumer v. Jackson County, 271 Mo. 594.. Nephi Irr. Co. v. Jenkins, 8 Utah 452.. Newburger v. Agt. Campbell, 58 How. Pr. 313. Niles v. Parks, 49 O. St. 370, 34 N. E. 735..... Norris v. Montezume Irr. Co., 248 Fed. 369. 24 ..279 Orr v. Schwager & Nettleton, 74 Wash. 631, 134 Pac. 501.. Pearson v. Seattle, 14 Wash. 348, 44 Pac. 884. 281 Peyton v. Hot Springs Co., 53 Ark. 236, 13 S. W. 764.. .282 .353 People v. Russell, 110 Mich. 46, 68 N. W. 1099. .353 People v. Wheeler, 142 Mich. 212, 105 N. W. 607. .353 .453 Phoebus v. Manhattan Club, 105 Va. 144. .282 150 .245 Ponting v. Noakes, 2 Q. B. Div. L. R. (1894) 281. Prugh v. Portsmouth Sav. Bank, 48 Neb. 414. 59 154 340 42 349 .474 Reynolds v. Stockton, 140 U. S. 254, 11 Sup. Ct. 773. 190 Rice v. Rice, 14 Ore. 337, 10 Pac. 495. .453 Richey v. Carpenter, 2 Wash. 512, 28 Pac. 380. Runner v. Dwiggins, 147 Ind. 238, 46 N. E. 580. .178 Ryan v. Quinlan, 124 Pac. 512, 45 Mont. 521.. .159 Saunders v. Mfg. Co., 27 Mich 522. .529 Scott v Carl, 24 Pa. Sup. Ct. 460. ..201 Scott v. New Castle (Ky), 21 L. R. A. N. S. 112. .279 Schaeffer v. Coldren, 237 Pa. St. 77, 85 Atl. 98, Ann. Cas. 1914B..313 Seeley v. Seeley, 12 Ann. Cas. 1059.. 52 Seaton & Son v. Hamilton Co., 10 Ia. 394. .533 Second Nat'l Bank v. Smith, 118 Wis. 18, 94 N. W. 664. 98 Seabary v. Fidelity Co., 205 Pa. St. 234. .477 Seattle Land Co. v. Day, 2 Wash. St., 27 Pac. 74. .477 .375 S. F. & B. Ass'n v. Watters, 141 Pa. St. 498, 21 Atl. 666. .201 Sherlock v. Stuart, 96 Mich. 193, 55 N. W. 845, 21 L. R. A. 580.. 84 Shipp v. Shelton, 193 Ala. 658, 69 So. 102. Shaw v. Foley, 62 O. St. 30, 56 N. E. 475. 98 .339 Shuber v. McDuffee (Okla.), 169 Pac. 642. .453 Sisk v. Crump, 112 Ind. 502, 14 N. E. 301, 2 Am. St. Rep. 213.... 53 Simmon v. Zimmerman, 144 Cal. 264, 79 Pac. 452.. .241 Simmons v. Saul, 138 U. S. 439, 11 Sup. Ct. 369.. 190 Skarr v. Eppeland, 35 N. D. 116, 159 N. W. 707. 99 Smyth v. Butters, et al., 38 Utah 151, 112 Pac. 809. ..803 Smidt v. Third Dist. Court, 23 Utah 302, 64 Pac. 869. 98 Smith v. Toledo, 14 O. C. C. 362.... .283 Soderberg v. King County, 15 Wash. 194, 55 Am. St. Rep. 878, 882 .279 Soloman v. McRae, 9 Colo. App. 23, 47 Pac. 409. 292 State v. Board of Education, 72 Mo. 436... 22 Stiles v. Guthrie, 3 Okla. 26, 41 Pac. 383. 22 State v. McLaughlin, 15 Kan. 228, 112 Am. St. Rep. 264. 22 Stoddard v. Sloan, 65 Ia. 680..... .487 Steinke v. Loofbourow, 17 Utah 252, 54 Pac. 120. Stutsman v. County of Mansfield, 5 Dak. 78, 37 N. W. 304.. ..452 State v. Simmons, 117 Ark. 159, 174 S. W. 238.. 33 State v. Hass, 142 La. 271, 76 So. 710. 33 State v. Woodruff, 68 N. J. L. 89, 52 Atl. 294. 33 State v. Chichester, 31 Neb. 325, 11 L. R. A. 104. 33 State v. Nobles, 109 Wis. 202... .128 State v. Brinkerhoff, 66 Tex. 45, 7 S. W. 109.. 128 State ex rel. Boyse v. Superior Court, 46 Wash. 616, 91 Pac. 4...131 State v. Bux, 145 Mo. 325, 36 S. W. 636, 33 L. R. A. 616.. State v. Commissioners Platte County, et al., 177 Pac. 131. Thorp v. St. L. & S. F. R. Co. (Okla.), 175 Pac. 240. .440 Triplett v. Sec. National Bank, 121 Va. 189; 92 S. E. 897. .200 Upton Co. v. Ferebee, 100 S. E. 310..... U. S. v. Schurz, 102 U. S. 397, 26 L. Ed. 167. Van Tobel v. Lewiston, 41 Mont. 226, 108 Pac. 910... ...365 ..239 .520 .159 .178 ..474 .126 97 Village of Nunda v. Chrystal Lake, 79 Ill. 310. 22 Volland v. Wilcox, 17 Neb. 46, 22 N. W. 71. 98 Walworth Estate, In re., 85 Vt. 322.... .417 Warran Admr. v. Prescott (Me.), 17 L. R. A. 435. White v. Horton, 154 Cal. 103, 97 Pac. 70, 18 L. R. A. N. S. 490. .349 Williams v. Carver, 171 Cal. 658, 154 Pac. 472. ..178 Williams v. Johnson, 50 Mont. 7, 144 Pac. 768. .187 Williams v. Williams, 117 Wis. 125, 94 N. W. 25. .201 Willis v. Ellis, 98 Miss. 197, 53 So. 498, 1913 Ann. Cas. 1039. ...292 Wineburgh v. Gay, 27 Cal. App. 603, 150 Pac. 1003.. .292 Wilson v. Carrico, 140 Ind. 533, 40 N. E. 50, 49 Am. St. Rep. 213.375 Wilcuts v. N. W. Life Ins. Co., 81 Ind. 300. 519 Williamett Real Estate Co. v. Henrix, 28 Ore. 485, 42 Pac. 514, 52 Am. St. Rep. 800.... ..535 Worth v. Newton, 10 Exch. 247. .127 Wood v. School Dist. No. 32 (Neb.), 115 N. W. 308, 15 L. R. A. N. S. 478 280 Wolverton v. Tuttle, 51 Ore. 501, 94 Pac. 961. ..477 Yousman v. Hanna, 35 N. D. 479, 160 N. W. 705, 161 N. W. 797..331 Young v. Queen Ins. Co. (Mo. App.), 201 S. W. 940.. REPORTS OF CASES DETERMINED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WYOMING [APRIL TERM, 1918.] BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS v. FEATHERSTONE. (No. 881; Decided August 7th, 1918; 174 Pac. 192.) TAXATION-PRESUMPTIONS-LEGALITY OF TAX LEVY-INJUNCTIONOFFICIAL ACTION-COMPLAINANT'S INTEREST-COLLECTION OF TAXES -TAX SALE-OFFICIAL ACTS-ADVERTISEMENT OF TAX SALEACCOUNT EQUITABLE JURSIDICTION—ADEQUATE REMEDY AT LAW. 1. Where it does not appear from the pleadings or evidence in an action to restrain the county treasurer from advertising at the expense of the county, a tax sale of irrigation district land, that taxes were levied on such land, the levy will be presumed to have been made as required by statute. 2. Where a county disclaiming liability for the expense of advertising a tax sale of irrigation district land may disallow a claim therefor and set up a complete defense to an action brought thereon, an injunction to restrain the treasurer from advertising such sale is unnecessary. 3. In a suit by a county and a resident thereof to restrain the county treasurer from advertising a tax sale of irrigation district land at the county's expense, where it did not appear that it either owned any of such land, or had any interest in the collection of such tax, an injunction should not be granted. 4. In an action to restrain the treasurer from advertising a tax sale of land upon the ground that such advertisement was futile and a waste of money, the court cannot assume, from failure to sell such land at former tax sales, that there would be no bidder at the proposed sale. 5. An injunction will not be granted to restrain a county treasurer from advertising tax sale of land upon the ground that the advertisement would be futile and a waste |