Commonwealth v. Hoffman-Henon Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Dissent
Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Justice Chidsey:
I am constrained to dissent for the reason that the construction placed by the majority upon the 1933 *222amendment to The Fiscal Code of 1929 subverts tbe avowed purpose of the Code, to provide revenue by taxation. It is not necessary to add to the facts which have been substantially and fairly recited in the majority opinion. Moreover, I fully subscribe to the basic question involved, as set forth therein: “. . . whether a straw man, to whom a corporation conveys its property for the purpose of having him mortgage it to secure a loan for the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Commonwealth v. Western Maryland Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
- Harper v. Consolidated Rubber Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Commonwealth v. Lowe Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- Schoyer v. Comet Oil & Refining Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Null v. StaigerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.