Virginia v. West Virginia
1916 U.S. LEXIS 1674 · 241 U.S. 531 · 36 S. Ct. 719 · 60 L. Ed. 1147
June 12, 1916 · Docket 2, Original
Headnotes
Generated summaries- Headnote 1
Virginia sought a writ of execution against West Virginia. The Court held that while it can render a decree, it cannot compel payment when the state itself is constitutionally barred from satisfying the judgment until its legislature appropriates funds.
- Headnote 2
West Virginia argued its legislature had not convened, and the Court agreed, ordering denial of the writ but allowing Virginia to renew the petition after the next legislative session when the state can appropriate funds.
- Headnote 3
West Virginia argued that, although the Court may render a decree, the Constitution does not grant it power to compel payment from a state that cannot satisfy the judgment under its own laws.
- Headnote 4
The Court found the first ground—lack of legislative appropriation—sufficient to refuse issuance of the writ at that time, emphasizing that the state needed the opportunity to provide for payment.
- Headnote 5
The order expressly allowed the petition to be refiled once West Virginia’s legislature reconvened and could consider appropriating money to satisfy the judgment.
- Headnote 6
Virginia sought a writ of execution against West Virginia; the Court held that, although it has original jurisdiction over interstate controversies, the Constitution does not grant it power to compel payment from a state that cannot be forced to satisfy the judgment.
- Headnote 7
The Court denied Virginia’s request for execution because West Virginia’s legislature had not met; it ordered the petition dismissed without prejudice, allowing renewal after the next legislative session.
- Headnote 8
Although Article III gives the Court power to decide controversies between states and issue decrees, the Constitution does not grant it power to compel payment from a sovereign state that has not consented to enforcement.
- Headnote 9
The Court held that because West Virginia’s legislative body had not convened to appropriate money, the state lacked the capacity to satisfy the judgment, so the execution request was refused, but the refusal left the possibility to re‑file later.
- Headnote 10
The order expressly stated that the petition could be renewed after the next session of West Virginia’s legislature meets and has a reasonable chance to provide for the judgment, reflecting the procedural rule governing renewal of execution against a sovereign state.
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the court.
In the original cause of Commonwealth of Virginia v. State of West Virginia, on June 14, 1915, a decree was rendered in favor of Virginia and against West Virginia for the sum of $12,393,929.50 with interest thereon at the rate of five pereentum from July 1st, 1915, until paid. 238 U. S. 202. Virginia now petitions for a writ of execution against West Virginia on the ground that such relief is necessary as the latter has taken no steps whatever to provide for the payment of the decree. West Virginia resists the granting of the execution on three grounds: (1) “Because the State of'West Virginia, within herself, has no power to pay the judgment in question, except through the legislative department of her government, and she should be given an opportunity to accept and abide by the decision of this court, and, in the due and ordinary course, to make provision, for its satisfaction, before any steps looking to her compulsion be taken; and to issue an execution at this time would deprive her of such opportunity, because her Legislature has not met since the rendition of said judgment, and will not again meet in regular session until the second Wednesday in January, 1917, and the members of that body have not yet .been chosen;” (2) because presumptively the State of West Virginia has no. property subject to execution; and (3) because although the Constitution imposes upon this court the duty, and grants it full power, to consider controversies between States and therefore authority to render the decree in question, yet with the grant of jurisdiction there was conferred no authority whatever to enforce a money judgment against a State if in the exercise of jurisdiction such a judgment was entered.
Without going further, we are of the opinion that the first ground furnishes adequate reason for hot granting the motion at this time.
The prayer for the issue of a writ of execution is therefore denied, without prejudice to the renewal of the same after the next session of the legislature of the State of West Virginia has met and had a reasonable opportunity to provide for the payment of the judgment.
And it is so ordered.