Deposit Bank of Frankfort v. Stone

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kentucky

Deposit Bank of Frankfort v. Stone

88 F. 986, 1898 U.S. App. LEXIS 2866

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kentucky

DecidedJune 4, 1898

DocketNo. 275

StatusPublished

This text of 88 F. 986 (Deposit Bank of Frankfort v. Stone) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Deposit Bank of Frankfort v. Stone, 88 F. 986, 1898 U.S. App. LEXIS 2866 (circtdky 1898).

Pincite

Opinion

TAFT, Circuit Judge.

In an injunction suit brought by the Deposit Bank of Frankfort against the county' of Franklin, in the Franklin circuit court, to prevent the collection of any taxes under the revenue act of 1892 in excess of those imposed by the Hewitt act (Act Ky. May 17, 1886), it was expressly adjudged on appeal by the court of appeals that the bank had, by its due acceptance of the terms of the Hewitt act, an irrevocable contract of exemption from taxation in excess of that imposed in the Hewitt act, and that the revenue act of 1892 violated this contract. In a similar injunction suit brought by the bank against the city of Frankfort, a decree in all respects similar was entered on the same ground. In accordance with our decision in the case of Bank of Kentucky v. Stone (just decided) 88 Fed. 383, we must therefore grant the motion for a preliminary injunction, and overrule the demurrer to the bill. :

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

TAFT, Circuit Judge.

In an injunction suit brought by the Deposit Bank of Frankfort against the county' of Franklin, in the Franklin circuit court, to prevent the collection of any taxes under the revenue act of 1892 in excess of those imposed by the Hewitt act (Act Ky. May 17, 1886), it was expressly adjudged on appeal by the court of appeals that the bank had, by its due acceptance of the terms of the Hewitt act, an irrevocable contract of exemption from taxation in excess of that imposed in the Hewitt act, and that the revenue act of 1892 violated this contract. In a similar injunction suit brought by the bank against the city of Frankfort, a decree in all respects similar was entered on the same ground. In accordance with our decision in the case of Bank of Kentucky v. Stone (just decided) 88 Fed. 383, we must therefore grant the motion for a preliminary injunction, and overrule the demurrer to the bill. :

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

88 F. 986, 1898 U.S. App. LEXIS 2866, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/deposit-bank-of-frankfort-v-stone-circtdky-1898.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack