Legal Opinion
State ex rel. H. A. Morton Co. v. Board of Review of Milwaukee
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided January 9, 1962PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBroadfoot, C. J.
The issue here is whether merchandise imported for sale and kept on hand by the importer-wholesaler to meet current or anticipated business demand is pro*333tected by sec. 10, art. I, clause 2 of the United States constitution from the ad valorem personal-property tax.
In United States Plywood Corp. v. Algoma, 2 Wis. (2d) 567, 87 N. W. (2d) 481, 358 U. S. 534, 79 Sup. Ct. 383, 3 L. Ed. (2d) 490, the United States supreme court affirmed the decision of this court and held that materials imported for use in manufacturing and stockpiled to supply the manufacturer’s current operating needs were so…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Brown v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1827
- Low v. AustinSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. BowersSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Parrott & Co. v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
- United States Plywood Corp. v. City of AlgomaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Department of Revenue v. James B. Beam Distilling Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Tricon, Inc. v. King CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1962
- Cominco Products, Inc. v. State Tax CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1966
- City of Farmers Branch v. Matsushita Electric Corp. of AmericaCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1975
- James B. Beam Distilling Co. v. Department of RevenueCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1963
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.