Summary of Opinion

Factual and Procedural Background

The J.K. Mullen Investment Company brought suit against the United States in the District Court for the District of Idaho (Eastern Division), contesting liability arising from local improvement district No. 9 in the village of American Falls. The district had issued special assessment improvement bonds in the aggregate principal amount of $25,500 to fund cement sidewalks and crosswalks. J.K. Mullen purchased 14 of those bonds (numbers 38–51) totaling $7,000.

The complaint alleged that assessments had been made but, through mistake or inadvertence, were insufficient to pay principal and interest as they became due. It further alleged that the United States, acting through the Department of the Interior and the United States Reclamation Service, appropriated property within the district for the American Falls Reservoir, sold or removed improvements, permanently flooded the land, and thereby destroyed the plaintiff’s method of payment of the bonds. The plaintiff sought recovery for unpaid assessments said to total $1,514.23 against the property taken by the government.

At trial the court found that all assessments required upon the properties taken by the government had been paid at the time suit was brought. The trial court nevertheless entered judgment for the plaintiff in the amount of $388.48. The United States appealed, and the Court of Appeals reversed and directed dismissal for lack of jurisdiction under the Tucker Act.

Legal Issues Presented

Whether the plaintiff was entitled to recover from the United States unpaid special-assessment obligations attributable to property taken and inundated for the American Falls Reservoir.
Whether the District Court had jurisdiction to entertain and grant the plaintiff relief under the Tucker Act (24 Stat. 505) in the circumstances shown by the record.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent	Rule or Principle Cited For	Application by the Court
United States v. John K. Catherine S. Mullen Benevolent Corp. (C.C.A.) 63 F.2d 48	Referred to for a general statement of the situation underlying these companion cases.	The court referred to that decision for background and relied on the reasons stated there in reaching the disposition of the present case.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court treated this matter as a companion case to United States v. John K. Catherine S. Mullen Benevolent Corp., referring to that opinion for a general statement of the situation. The court analyzed the complaint's allegations and the trial court's findings and reached these key points:

The complaint alleged unpaid assessments against lots taken by the United States and claimed the government's actions destroyed the plaintiff's method of payment, leaving unpaid assessments totaling $1,514.23.
The trial court expressly found as a fact that all assessments required upon the properties taken by the government had been paid at the time the suit was brought. Because the action was predicated on the existence of unpaid assessments, that factual finding meant the plaintiff failed to establish the basis for recovery.
Despite that finding, the trial court entered a judgment for $388.48, a figure derived as 25.92% of the balance due on the bonds after certain deductions. The percentage 25.92% was computed by comparing the proportionate area of the district taken by the United States with the remainder of the district, pursuant to figures tied to Ordinance No. 125 and a reassessment roll that placed $1,514.23 of the reassessed amount on the property taken by the United States.
The Court of Appeals observed that the trial-court procedure resulted in awarding the entire amount attributable to the taken property to the appellee, although appellee had purchased only a portion ($7,000 of $25,500) of the bond issue and the record did not make clear the status of other bonds.
For the reasons stated in the companion case and because the evidence and findings showed the assessments that formed the predicate for the action had been paid, the appellate court concluded the district court lacked jurisdiction under the Tucker Act to grant the relief entered.

Holding and Implications

HOLDING: The judgment of the District Court is reversed, and the case is directed to be dismissed. The appellate court ordered the trial court to enter judgment on the findings dismissing the plaintiff's action for lack of jurisdiction under the Tucker Act (24 Stat. 505).

Implications: The direct consequence of this decision is dismissal of the plaintiff's suit against the United States in the District Court for lack of Tucker Act jurisdiction. The opinion instructs that the claimant must seek redress, if any, from Congress. The opinion does not announce any broader precedent beyond the disposition of this case and its reliance on the companion decision.

Show full summary ...

UNITED STATES v. J.K. MULLEN INV. CO.

WILBUR, Circuit Judge.

This is a companion case to United States v. John K. Catherine S. Mullen Benevolent Corp. (C.C.A.) 63 F.2d 48. We refer to that decision for a general statement of the situation.

The present case was brought by J.K. Mullen Investment Company based upon the establishment of local improvement district No. 9 in the village of American Falls for the construction of cement sidewalks and crosswalks in that village. The aggregate principal of the special assessment improvement bonds issued therefor was $25,500. It is alleged that assessments were made to pay said bonds, "but that through mistake or inadvertence the levies and assessments so made and levied were not in fact sufficient to pay the principal and interest on said bonds as the same became due and payable or at all." The bonds were payable ten years from date, that is, on September 1, 1926, together with interest on said sum from date thereof, September 1, 1916, until paid, at the rate of 7 per cent. per annum payable semiannually. Each bond provided that it was redeemable at the option of said village after a certain date therein specified.

It is alleged that J.K. Mullen purchased 14 bonds of $500 denomination, numbered 38 to 51 aggregating $7,000; that assessments were made and levied to pay these bonds in accordance with the law "until prevented from so doing by the acts of the defendant." It was then alleged that the United States, acting through the Department of the Interior and the United States Reclamation Service, had appropriated the property within the local improvement district for reclamation reservoir known as the American Falls Reservoir; that it sold, destroyed, and moved all improvements located on the lots, permanently flooded the land, and "thereby completely and permanently destroyed plaintiff's one and only method of payment and assessment of bonds aforesaid against the hereinafter described lots, etc."; that the bonds owned by plaintiff were worth their face value and that "by and through the defendant's destruction of plaintiff's property * * * the defendant became liable and indebted to plaintiff in the amount of unpaid assessments outstanding and unpaid against the above described lots so inundated and possessed by the defendant; that the total of the unpaid assessments against the above described lots so due and unpaid was $1514.23."

It will be observed that this complaint, unlike that in the companion case, is predicated upon the existence of unpaid assessments against the lots acquired by the government. The trial court, however, found as a fact that all assessments made upon the properties required by the government were paid at the time the suit was brought. For that reason the motion for a nonsuit made at the conclusion of all the evidence should have been granted.

The judgment in this case, for $388.48, is not for the amount of unpaid assessments upon which action is predicated, for these assessments had already been paid, but it is for 25.92 per cent. of the balance due upon the bonds, after deduction of amounts paid by or for the property holders which should have been applied at the time of payment by the city authorities.

The findings state that the percentage of 25.92 is obtained by comparing the proportionate area of district No. 9 taken by the United States government for use as a reservoir site with the balance of the district. Apparently these figures were arrived at in the following manner: By Ordinance No. 125 providing for the reassessment in district No. 9 it is stated that the amount theretofore levied as assessments to pay the bonds was insufficient. The ordinance stated: "* * * The original assessment having been paid, but being insufficient to pay the total of said bonds and interest issued for the construction of the improvements authorized by said ordinance, and there remains due, owing and unpaid on account of said improvements the sum of $5880.64; therefore, the committee on streets for the city of American Falls, together with the city engineer, are hereby authorized and directed to make and present * * * a reassessment roll * * * against the various tracts and parcels of land within such improvement district, which shall be sufficient to raise and produce the amount of money necessary to pay and discharge the amounts of money remaining unpaid as aforesaid."

In pursuance of this authorization the amount thus reassessed against the property taken by the United States was $1,514.23. The trial court concluded that the balance due upon the bonds after the payment of the moneys which should properly have been applied thereto was $1,595.79. Inasmuch as the total due was reduced to $1,595.75, the court proportionately reduced the amount due from the property taken by the government, making the balance thus found due $388.48.

By this procedure it will be observed the entire amount properly due from the property taken over by the United States is made payable to the appellee, although it purchased only $7,000 of the $25,500 bond issue. It may be true that all the other bonds had been paid, but this is not made clear in the record.

For the reasons stated in the companion case and for the further reason that the evidence and findings show that the amounts of the assessments upon which the action was predicated have been paid, the judgment is reversed and the trial court directed to enter judgment on the findings, dismissing plaintiff's action for lack of jurisdiction under the Tucker Act (24 Stat. 505). Claimant must seek such redress as may be appropriate from the Congress.

UNITED STATES v. J.K. MULLEN INV. CO