Legal Opinion
Stroop v. Rutherford County
Tennessee Supreme Court
Decided June 5, 1978PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BROCK, Justice.
The plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated to recover payments of privilege taxes lev ied upon transfers of realty pursuant to an unconstitutional private act of the legislature, Chapter 172 of the Private Acts of 1969. Pursuant to the motion of the defendants, the trial court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. See Tenn.R. Civ.P. 12.02.
The sole ground asserted in the motion to dismiss was that:
“The complaint on its face shows that these plaintiffs failed to pay the transfer…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Railroad Co. v. CommissionersSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Southern Service Co. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- Mercury Machine Importing Corp. v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1957
- Holloway v. Putnam CountyTennessee Supreme Court · 1976
- Malin v. County of LamoureNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1914
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- City of Fairmont v. Pitrolo Pontiac-Cadillac Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1983
- Sky Transpo, Inc. v. City of KnoxvilleTennessee Supreme Court · 1985
- Lebanon Liquors, Inc. v. City of LebanonCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1994
- Aluminum Co. of America v. CelauroTennessee Supreme Court · 1988
- Bill's Institutional Commissary Corp. v. Shelby CountyCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1979
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.