State ex rel. Attorney General v. Bodcaw Lumber Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Lafayette Chancery Court; James M. Barker, Chancellor; 1. The complaint stated a canse of action and should have been answered. If imperfect or incomplete in detail, or uncertain in its allegations, the objection should have been presented by motion—not demurrer. Kirby’s Dig., § 6106; 72 Ark. 58; 93 Id. 371; 96 Id. 163; 101 Id. 350; 107 Id. M2. 2. Defendant is liable to a property tax upon its capital stock.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Lafayette Chancery Court; James M. Barker, Chancellor; 1. The complaint stated a canse of action and should have been answered. If imperfect or incomplete in detail, or uncertain in its allegations, the objection should have been presented by motion—not demurrer. Kirby’s Dig., § 6106; 72 Ark. 58; 93 Id. 371; 96 Id. 163; 101 Id. 350; 107 Id. M2. 2. Defendant is liable to a property tax upon its capital stock. Kirby’s Digest, § § 6872, 837, 841, 6899, 6903-4, 6906, 6936, 6873; Const., art. 2, § 23, art. 16, § § 7, 5, 6; 46 Ark. 331; 2 Id. 291; 5 Id. 204; 25 Id. 289; 43 Id. 525; 46…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
The Attorney General instituted this action in .the chancery court of Lafayette County against the Bodcaw Lumber Company, a domestic corp oration domiciled in that county, to recover taxes alleged to he due the State and its subdivisions by reason of the failure of said corporation to assess all of its property for taxation for certain years. The right to sue is predicated upon the authority of the statute embraced in Kirby’s Digest, section 7204, et seq., as amended by the act of May 30,1911 (page 324), and further amended by the act of March 12, 1913 (page 724), providing that where it is…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Kidd v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Corry v. Mayor and Council of BaltimoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Wright v. Louisville & Nashville RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Fordyce v. NixSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1893
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Sims v. AhrensSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1925
- State Ex Rel. Attorney General v. Chicago Mill & Lumber Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
- State Ex Rel. Attorney General v. Lion Oil Refining Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1926
- State ex rel. Attorney General v. Fort Smith Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1917
- Crossett Lumber Co. v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.