Legal Opinion

Scurlock v. Henderson

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 31, 1954No. 5-339PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

G-rieein Smith, Chief Justice.

The question for determination is whether tax exemptions provided by § 6(d) of Act 487 of 1949, Ark. Stat’s, § 84-3106 (sup.) may be invoked in favor of one who purchases machinery for ginning cotton. The exemption extends to tangible personal property “. . . used by manufacturers or processors or distributors for further processing, compounding, or manufacturing; [also] tangible personal property used for repair, replacement, or expansion of existing manufacturing or processing facilities . . .”

In March, 1951, W. A. Henderson, Jr., purchased gin machinery from a…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Brodie v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1893
  2. Assessors of Boston v. Commissioner of Corporations & TaxationMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1949
  3. Wiseman v. Madison Cadillac CompanySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1935
  4. Moore v. Farmers Mutual Manufacturing & Ginning Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1938
  5. Georgia Warehouse Co. v. JolleySupreme Court of Georgia · 1931

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Arkansas Beverage Company v. HeathSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1975
  2. John B. May Co. v. McCastlainSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1968
  3. Cheney v. Georgia-Pacific Paper CorporationSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1963
  4. Peterson Produce Company v. CheneySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1964
  5. Pellerin Laundry Mach. Sales Co. v. CheneySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1963

10 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