Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Budd Wheel Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 23, 1927No. Appeals, 30 and 31PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Simpson,

These two cases raise but one question, viz.: Did the court below err in valuing defendant’s no-par capital stock at $100 per share, when determining the amount of bonus which should be paid on the various increases thereof? Defendant being a domestic corporation, this question is to be answered by considering only the statutes of the State; it is not affected by any provision of the Constitution of the United States, or the Acts of Congress passed in pursuance thereof: Roberts & Schaefer Co. v. Emmerson, 271 U. S. 50.

Section 1 of our Act of May 3, 1899, P. L.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Sugar Notch BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
  2. Roberts & Schaefer Co. v. EmmersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
  3. Smith v. Yellow Cab Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  4. Reeves v. Philadelphia Suburban Water Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  5. Commonwealth v. Wayne Sewerage Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Montgomery County Bar Ass'n v. RinalducciSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  2. Amalgamated Transit Union, Division 85 v. Port AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
  3. Commonwealth v. Fireman's Fund InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
  4. Commonwealth Ex Rel. v. DavisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  5. Camden Safe Deposit & Trust Co. v. EavensonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API