Legal Opinion · Dissent
The Pullman Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided January 4, 1947No. Nos. 33,977, 33,978, 33,979PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Dissent
The question here is whether relator is exempt, under Mason St. 1927, § 2278, as to taxes paid for the years 1934 and 1936, from the provisions of § 2 of the franchise tax act (L. 1933, c. 405), and whether it is exempt under the same act as amended by Ex. Sess. L. 1937, c. 3, as to tax so paid for the year 1937, from the provisions of the said franchise tax act.
Prior to 1906, the constitution of Minnesota provided for the taxation of sleeping car companies in the form of a gross receipts tax. Minn. Const. art. 9, § 17. The so-called "wide open" tax amendment of 1906 repealed art. 9, § 17.…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Home Insurance v. New York StateSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Southern Railway Co. v. WattsSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Spreckels Sugar Refining Co. v. McClainSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Commonwealth v. Columbia Gas & Electric Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Union Steam Pump Sales Co. v. Secretary of StateMichigan Supreme Court · 1921
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- The Pullman Co. v. Commissioner of TaxationSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1947