Legal Opinion
State Ex Rel. Attorney General v. Chicago Mill & Lumber Corp.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Decided December 21, 1931PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Hart, C. J.,
(after stating the facts). The correctness of the decree of the chancery court depends upon the proper interpretation to be given to what is commonly known as our “back tax statute.”
Our original back tax act was passed by the Legislature of 1887, and its title recites that it is “An act to provide for the collection of overdue taxes from corporations doing business in the State.” Acts of 1887, p. 33; Kirby’s Digest, §§ 7204-7213, inclusive. This act was amended by the Legislature of 1911 so as to fix the com-' pensation to be paid to special counsel employed to assist the Attorney…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. of Texas v. AlexanderSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Fort Smith Lumber Co. v. Arkansas Ex Rel. ArbuckleSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Weyerhaueser v. MinnesotaSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- White River Lumber Co. v. Arkansas Ex Rel. ApplegateSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- State ex rel. Moose v. Kansas City & Memphis Railway & Bridge Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Henderson v. RussellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1979
- Neely v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994
- Page v. Highway 10, Water Pipe Line Improvement District No. 1Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1940
- Johnson v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1950
- Roachell v. GatesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1932
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.