Kimball v. Cotting
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract for reimbursement for income taxes paid by the plaintiff on rent received under a lease to the defendants, it being alleged in the declaration that, by the provisions of the covenant in the lease described below, the taxes should have been paid by the defendants. Writ dated October 23, 1918. In the Superior Court the case came on to be heard upon an agreed statement of facts before Wait, J. Material facts are stated in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Contract for reimbursement for income taxes paid by the plaintiff on rent received under a lease to the defendants, it being alleged in the declaration that, by the provisions of the covenant in the lease described below, the taxes should have been paid by the defendants. Writ dated October 23, 1918. In the Superior Court the case came on to be heard upon an agreed statement of facts before Wait, J. Material facts are stated in the opinion. The judge at the request of the parties reported the case upon the pleadings and the agreed statement of facts for determination by this court.
1Opinion of the CourtBraley, J.
The defendants, while conceding that the plaintiff ■can recover the normal federal income tax which he has paid each *173year during the period named in the record, contend that they are not liable for the additional or surtax for which he also seeks reimbursement.
The taxes are not taxes upon the premises, but upon the rental therefrom considered as income received by the lessor from the lessees, and for this reason the covenant construed in Codman v. American Piano Co. 229 Mass. 285, requiring the lessee to pay "all taxes and assessments whatsoever which may be payable for or in respect of the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Codman v. American Piano Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918
- Suter v. Jordan Marsh Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
- Kimball v. CottingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918
- Welch v. PhillipsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
3Cited by12 opinions
- Bemis v. ConverseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1923
- Stony Brook Railroad v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1927
- United Shoe Machinery Corp. v. Gale Shoe Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
- McDuffie v. NoonanWashington Supreme Court · 1934
- Eastern Massachusetts Street Railway Co. v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1942
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.