Fargo v. Hart
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR ' THE DISTRICT OF INDIANA. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. The constitutionality of the state law has beensustained but this suit involves whether in the practical administration of the law the taxing authorities are -not depriving express companies of rights secured by the Constitution. The system of taxation is that which has become known as the “unit system.”
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR ' THE DISTRICT OF INDIANA. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. The constitutionality of the state law has beensustained but this suit involves whether in the practical administration of the law the taxing authorities are -not depriving express companies of rights secured by the Constitution. The system of taxation is that which has become known as the “unit system.” Adopted by the States, and sustained by this court as a method of taxing railroad property (Maine v. Grand Trunk Railway, 142 U. S. 217; Pittsburgh &c. Railway…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Holmes
This is an appeal from a decree of the United States District Court dismissing the plaintiffs bill .and supplemental bills. The bill was brought by the president of the American Express Company, a joint stock company of New York, on behalf of himself and the other members of the company, to enjoin the auditor of the State of Indiana from certifying an assessment for 1898 to the auditors of the several counties of the State. Supplemental bills sought the like remedy in respect of the assessments for the following years through 1901. The ground of relief is that the assessments will result in…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Taylor v. SecorSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. BackusSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Adams Express Co. v. Ohio State AuditorSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Adams Express Co. v. Ohio State AuditorSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- California v. Central Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by134 opinions
- Miller Brothers Co. v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Co. v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Dana Leigh Thompson v. County of Franklin, William A. Hughes, Treasurer of Franklin CountyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
- ASARCO Inc. v. Idaho State Tax CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. v. BabcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
129 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.