Legal Opinion

Schlesinger v. State

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 6, 1928PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Stevens, J.(1) The chief question argued is the right to recover interest from the state.

Sub. (2) of sec. 72.08 of the Statutes provides that when any inheritance tax “shall have been paid erroneously into the state treasury, it shall be lawful for the state treasurer upon receiving a transcript from the county court record showing the facts to refund the amount of such erroneous or illegal payment.” It will be noted that the statute does not authorize the payment of interest upon the amount refunded.

The great weight of authority on this question supports the rule established by the supreme…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. United States v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  2. Laycock v. ParkerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
  3. United States v. VerdierSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  4. Seton v. HoytOregon Supreme Court · 1899
  5. Eaton v. St. Louis-S. F. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925

28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Holytz v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
  2. Lakefront Realty Corp. v. LorenzIllinois Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Moskowitz v. Mayor & Council of WilmingtonSupreme Court of Delaware · 1978
  4. Glass v. Prudential Ins. Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Alabama · 1945
  5. State v. P.G. Miron Construction Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1994

36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API