Legal Opinion
Vancouver Oil Co. v. Henneford
Washington Supreme Court
Decided August 28, 1935No. 25759. En BancPublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMain, J.
This action was brought to restrain the defendants from enforcing Title IV, chapter 180, Laws of 1935, p. 726, Rem. 1935 Sup., § 8370-31 et seq., being that part of the chapter which covers the matter of what is called the compensating* tax. To the complaint a demurrer was interposed and sustained. The plaintiff elected to stand upon its complaint and refused to plead further. From the judgment dismissing the action, it appeals.
The facts, as stated in the complaint, which will present the questions here for determination, may be .summarized as follows: The appellant, Vancouver Gil Company, is…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Baldwin v. G. A. F. Seelig, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Sonneborn Brothers v. CuretonSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Gregg Dyeing Co. v. QuerySupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Bowman v. Continental Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Helson & Randolph v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1929
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Henneford v. Silas Mason Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Roth Drug, Inc. v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- Jensen v. HennefordWashington Supreme Court · 1936
- Black v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1965
- Douglas Aircraft Co., Inc. v. JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.