Federal Deposit Insurance v. Board of Finance & Revenue of Commonwealth
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Horace Stern,
As the court below properly held, plaintiffs in these cases did not meet the statutory requirements which, if complied with, would have entitled them to refunds of taxes allegedly paid under an erroneous interpretation of the law.
The determination of the questions here presented depends principally upon the chronology of the proceedings from which they arose.
The Emaus National Bank filed with the Department of Revenue a shares tax report for the year 1939 for taxes imposed by the Act of July 15, 1897, P.L. 292, as amended. Settlement was made by the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Logan v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Grime v. Department of Public InstructionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- Guy v. Stoecklein Baking Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Commonwealth v. Quaker City Cab Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Ratto v. Pennsylvania Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by74 opinions
- Lukus v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Gilligan v. Pennsylvania Horse Racing CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Commonwealth v. Western Maryland Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
- Loeb EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
- Land Holding Corp. v. Board of Finance & RevenueSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
69 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.