Asmer v. LIVINGSTON
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
Oxner, Justice.
Respondent, a retail liquor dealer in the City of Columbia, seeks an adjudication that under Section 65-1268 of the 1952 Code, he is entitled to a refund of $3,680.94, representing the amount of tax stamps affixed to certain aleo holic beverages in his place of business which, as the result of a fire, were either totally destroyed or so badly damaged as to be unfit for sale. The Tax Commission, appellant here, demurred to the complaint upon the ground that a refund under the Code section mentioned can only be made to the holder of a valid wholesaler’s license. The Court below…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Arrott v. Allegheny CountySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- City of Spartanburg v. LeonardSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1936
- Daniel v. RichcreekCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1938
- People Ex Rel. Herlihy Mid-Continent Co. v. NudelmanIllinois Supreme Court · 1938
- Hadden v. South Carolina Tax CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1937
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- TNS Mills, Inc. v. South Carolina Department of RevenueSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1998
- SunTrust Bank, Nashville v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2000
- Furman University v. LivingstonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1964
- Edisto Fleets, Inc. v. South Carolina Tax CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1971
- Roper v. South Carolina Tax CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1957
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.