Arkansas-Louisiana Pipe Line Co. v. Coverdale
District Court, W.D. Louisiana
1DissentHutcheson, Circuit Judge
(Dissenting) .
The primary purpose of the statute appears to have been to impose a license tax upon the production of power. It thus imposed not a property, but an -excise or privilege, tax. Union Sulphur Co. v. Reid (D.C.) 17 F.Supp. 27, this day decided. State ex rel. Porterie v. Hunt, 182 La. 1073, 162 So. 777, 103 A.L.R. 9; Bromley v. McCaughn, 280 U.S. 124, 50 S.Ct. 46, 74 L.Ed. 226.
The majority concludes that, because the tax is a privilege, and not a property, tax, and falls on the generation by complainant of power, used in part to gather gas into and in part to transport it through…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- A. L. A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Coe v. ErrolSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- UTAH POWER & LIGHT CO. v. PFOST, COMMISSIONER OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Oliver Iron Mining Co. v. LordSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Bromley v. McCaughnSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.