Leahy v. State Treasurer of Oklahoma

297 U.S. 420, 56 S. Ct. 507, 80 L. Ed. 771, 1936 U.S. LEXIS 532
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedMarch 2, 1936
Docket599
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 297 U.S. 420 (Leahy v. State Treasurer of Oklahoma) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Leahy v. State Treasurer of Oklahoma, 297 U.S. 420, 56 S. Ct. 507, 80 L. Ed. 771, 1936 U.S. LEXIS 532 (1936).

Opinion

*421 Mr. Justice Brandéis

delivered the .opinion of the Court.

Leahy brought this action in a court of Oklahoma against the State Treasurer and others to recover $11.99 paid under protest as state income tax. He is a duly enrolled member of the Osage Tribe of Indians, and has long held a certificate of competency. As such member he is entitled to receive, from time to time, his pro rata share of the income of the restricted mineral resources of the Tribe held by the United States for the Tribe under the Act of June 28, 1906, c. 3572, 34 Stat. 539, and later legislation. The tax challenged is upon such income paid to' him. Leahy claims that it is void because laid by the State upon a federal instrumentality. The trial court overruled the contention and entered judgment for the defendants. On the authority of Choteau v. Burnet, 283 U. S. 691, its action was affirmed by the Supreme Court of the State, three judges dissenting. 173 Okla. 614; 49 P. (2d) 570. We granted certiorari because of the constitutional question presented.

The- facts are substantially the same as those presented in Choteau v. Burnet, supra, which upheld a federal income tax on a like payment. The applicable statutes and decisions are discussed- there. As Leahy was entitled to have the income paid to him and was free to use it as he saw fit, no reason appears why it should not be taxable also by the State.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Marshall Stranburg
799 F.3d 1324 (Eleventh Circuit, 2015)
George v. Tax Appeals Tribunal
155 A.D.2d 784 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Aubertin v. Colville Confederated Tribes
446 F. Supp. 430 (E.D. Washington, 1978)
CONFEDERATED SALISH & KOOTENAI TRIBES, MONT. v. Moe
392 F. Supp. 1297 (D. Montana, 1975)
Omaha Tribe of Indians v. Peters
382 F. Supp. 421 (D. Nebraska, 1974)
Walker River Paiute Tribe v. Sheehan
370 F. Supp. 816 (D. Nevada, 1973)
Mescalero Apache Tribe v. Jones
411 U.S. 145 (Supreme Court, 1973)
McClanahan v. Arizona State Tax Commission
411 U.S. 164 (Supreme Court, 1973)
McClanahan v. State Tax Commission
484 P.2d 221 (Court of Appeals of Arizona, 1971)
Commissioner of Taxation v. Brun
174 N.W.2d 120 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1970)
State Tax Commission v. Barnes
14 Misc. 2d 311 (New York County Courts, 1958)
Canary v. Oklahoma Tax Commission
1956 OK 92 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1956)
Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Texas Co.
336 U.S. 342 (Supreme Court, 1949)
McKnight v. Panther
1941 OK 386 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1941)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
297 U.S. 420, 56 S. Ct. 507, 80 L. Ed. 771, 1936 U.S. LEXIS 532, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leahy-v-state-treasurer-of-oklahoma-scotus-1936.