Toy Nat. Bank of Sioux City v. Nelson
District Court, N.D. Iowa
1Opinion of the Court
SCOTT, District Judge.
The three foregoing entitled eases were simultaneously brought against common defendants to recover sums of money paid yearly as taxes over a period of years 1923 to 1929, inclusive. The allegations of the respective petitions are the same in substance, mutatis mutandis. The following statement of material and controlling facts alleged in the several petitions is taken from the plaintiffs’ brief. Comparison with the petitions themselves convince me that the statement is a fair one, and sufficient to serve as a basis for consideration of the legal questions presented by…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- F. S. Royster Guano Co. v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fé Railway Co. v. EllisSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Sioux City Bridge Co. v. Dakota CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Greene v. Louisville & Interurban RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Cummings v. National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hammerstrom v. Toy Nat. Bank of Sioux CityCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1936
- Toy Nat. Bank v. SmithDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1934