CHANROBLES VIRTUAL LAW LIBRARY
US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for www.chanrobles.com


SOUTHERN OPERATING CO. V. HAYS, 236 U. S. 188 (1915)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 236 U. S. 188 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Southern Operating Co. v. Hays, 236 U.S. 188 (1915)

Southern Operating Company v. Hays

No. 122

Argued January 14, 1915

Decided February 23, 1915

236 U.S. 188

ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT

OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE

Syllabus

Decided on the authority of Heyman v. Hays, ante, p. 236 U. S. 178.

The facts are stated in the opinion. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 236 U. S. 189

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

This case was brought to enjoin the collection of a state and county privilege tax upon the same facts as those which were involved in the case just decided. The two cases in both the trial and the court below were heard together, and they were here argued at the same time. The court below, in disposing of this case, with one exception, placed its conclusion upon the same grounds upon which it decided the previous case. The one exception referred to was a declaration that the trial court erred in granting the injunction so far as the state tax was concerned because there was no authority to enjoin the collection of such a tax, and the only right was to pay under protest and sue to recover. Whatever difference between the two cases would otherwise result from that point of view need not be considered, since the attorney general of the state, in the argument at bar, in express terms states that that question is not insisted upon. It being thus removed from consideration, a complete identity between the two cases results, and, for the reasons given in the previous case, the judgment in this case must also be reversed.

Reversed.





Back
ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for chanrobles.com Search for www.chanrobles.com


Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



www.chanrobles.us




QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

Browse By ->> Volume


cralaw

Browse By ->> Year


cralaw

  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
 
RED