Flying Tiger Line, Inc. v. County of Los Angeles
California Supreme Court
1DissentTraynor, J.
I dissent.
Migratory property not subject to taxation elsewhere remains taxable at the owner’s domicile, for otherwise it would escape taxation altogether. (New York Central & H. R. Co. v. Miller, 202 U.S. 584, 597 [26 S.Ct. 714, 50 L.Ed. 1155]; Southern Pac. Co. v. Kentucky, 222 U.S. 63, 69, 73 [32 S.Ct. 13, 56 L.Ed. 96] ; Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. Minnesota, 322 U.S. 292, 294 [64 S.Ct. 950, 88 L.Ed. 1283,153 A.L.R. 245] ; Braniff Airways, Inc. v. Nebraska State Board of Eq. &A., 347 U.S. 590, 602 [74 S.Ct. 757, 98 L.Ed. 967]; Olson v. City & County of San Francisco, 148 Cal. 80, 83, 84 [82…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Western Live Stock v. Bureau of RevenueSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. MinnesotaSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Braniff Airways, Inc. v. Nebraska State Board of Equalization & AssessmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Wheeling Steel Corp. v. FoxSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Ott v. Mississippi Valley Barge Line Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.