Legal Opinion

City of Muskegon v. Lange

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided February 12, 1895PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Error to Muskegon. (Palmer, J., presiding.) Assumpsit. Plaintiff brings error. The facts; are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtHooker, J.

The defendant was cashier of a national bank in the city of Muskegon. Taxes were assessed against, the several stockholders upon the stock of said bank, two-of whom failed to pay. Demand was then made upon the-defendant, who refused payment. The action is based upon section 33 of Act No. 195, Laws of 1889 (3 How. Stat. §• 1170(22), which provides:

“In case of any tax assessed upon the shares of the-capital stock of any bank, he [the treasurer] shall call upon the cashier of such bank, and demand payment thereof; and thereupon it shall be the duty of such cashier to pay the same, and charge the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Lionberger v. RouseSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
  2. Eyke v. LangeMichigan Supreme Court · 1892

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Bay v. Citizens State BankSupreme Court of Missouri · 1918
  2. Shainwald v. First National Bank of WeiserIdaho Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Wayne County & Home Sav. Bank v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1932
  4. Wayne County & Home Savings Bank v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1932
  5. Manufacturers National Bank v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API