Legal Opinion · Dissent

Vaughn & Ragsdale Co. v. State Board of Equalization

Montana Supreme Court

Decided July 14, 1939No. 7,954Published

1Dissent

Mr. Justice Angstman:

I dissent. I think the learned trial judge was correct in upholding Chapter 199, Laws of 1937.

It should be remembered that it was stipulated and the court found: That when the bill was originally introduced in the house as House Bill No. 38, the enacting clause read: “Be it enacted by the People of the State of Montana;” that it was amended in committee of the whole in the house and before its passage on third reading to read, “Be it Enacted by the Legislative Assembly of the State of Montana.” In this manner, and without any further amendment of the enacting clause, the…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Reed v. JonesWashington Supreme Court · 1893
  2. New York & Long Island Bridge Co. v. SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
  3. Barth v. PockMontana Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Martien v. PorterMontana Supreme Court · 1923
  5. Kilgore v. MageeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1877

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API