Boise Artesian Hot & Cold Water Co. v. Boise City

Background

A water company that used city streets for pipes was sued over local ordinance No. 678, which charged a license fee or rental for using the streets. The company removed the case from state court to federal court based on diversity of citizenship and defended itself by saying it had prior street easements and that the ordinance conflicted with constitutional protections. The trial judge, after facts were stipulated and no jury was used, found for the city. The company then took the case to the federal appeals court, which reversed and sent the case back for a new trial.

Reasoning

The central procedural question was whether the Supreme Court could hear another review after the federal appeals court had already decided the case. The Court explained that the parties had relied on diversity removal and chose to have the appeals court decide the matter. Under the Judiciary Act of 1891, the Court said, this situation does not allow two successive reviews — first by the appeals court and then again here. Citing earlier decisions, the Court dismissed the company’s attempt to bring the case back to the Supreme Court for further review.

Real world impact

This ruling is procedural: it leaves the appeals court’s reversal and remand in place and prevents a second Supreme Court review in the same case. The deeper question about whether the ordinance itself violates the Constitution was not decided here; that issue remains for the lower courts on remand and possible further appeals consistent with the 1891 law.