State v. Eagle Lumber Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Ouachita Chancery Court; James M. Barker, Chancellor; 1. Foreign and domestic corporations are treated alike in all constitutional and statutory provisions. Const.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Ouachita Chancery Court; James M. Barker, Chancellor; 1. Foreign and domestic corporations are treated alike in all constitutional and statutory provisions. Const. Ark., art. 12; act No. 19, Acts 1899', p. 18; act 168, Acts 1899, p. 305; act 216, Acts 1901, p. 386; act No. 313, Acts 1907, p. 744; Kirby’s Digest, §§ 824-833; C. & M. Dig., $§ 1825-8. Affirmative legislation was necessary to render operative the above constitutional provision, swpra, which has been held “not self-executing. ” 65 Ark. 312, 315; 45 S. W. 988; 60 Ark. 325, 332-3; 30 S. W. 350. The legal status of…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
The Attorney General instituted this action on behalf of the State of Arkansas against the defendant, Eagle Lumber Company, a foreign corporation, to recover unpaid taxes alleged to be due on its capital stock since the time it began doing business in this State in the year 1899' up to the time of the commencement of the suit in 1919. The facts are undisputed, and are set forth in a -written stipulation signed by counsel on both sides.
The defendant is a private corporation, organized under the laws of the State of Iowa, and it began doing business in the State of Arkansas on March 3, 1899,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State ex rel. Attorney General v. Bodcaw Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1917
- State ex rel. Attorney General v. Fort Smith Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1917
- Crossett Lumber Co. v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
- State v. Gloster Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1921