Louisville v. Third National Bank

Supreme Court

Louisville v. Third National Bank

174 U.S. 435, 19 S. Ct. 874, 43 L. Ed. 1037, 1899 U.S. LEXIS 1508

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedMay 15, 1899

Docket364

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 174 U.S. 435 (Louisville v. Third National Bank) 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

Louisville v. Third National Bank, 174 U.S. 435, 19 S. Ct. 874, 43 L. Ed. 1037, 1899 U.S. LEXIS 1508 (1899).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice White

delivered the opinion of the court.

The appellee, the Third National Bank, filed its bill to enjoin the collection of certain taxes, relying upon grounds in all respects like unto those alleged in case No. 404, cante, p. 432. There was, however, this difference between the facts of the latter case and those arising on this record -: In this case the taxes sought to be enjoined were levied prior to the renewal of the charter of the bank. Because of this difference the court below concluded that the want of power to assess and levy was conclusively established by the presumption of the thing adjudged arising from the decree of the Court of Appeals of Kentucky, to which we have referred in case No. 404. We need not, however, consider the question of res judicata upon which the court below based its conclusion, as we have in case No. 404, just announced, held entirely without reference to the plea of res judicata, that taxes in form exactly like those here in question were illegal because levied upon the property and franchise of the bank, and not upon the shares of ■ stock in the names of the shareholders. It follows, therefore, that the decree below which restrained the collection of the taxes was correct, and it is therefore.

Affirmed,

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

Mr. Justice White

delivered the opinion of the court.

The appellee, the Third National Bank, filed its bill to enjoin the collection of certain taxes, relying upon grounds in all respects like unto those alleged in case No. 404, cante, p. 432. There was, however, this difference between the facts of the latter case and those arising on this record -: In this case the taxes sought to be enjoined were levied prior to the renewal of the charter of the bank. Because of this difference the court below concluded that the want of power to assess and levy was conclusively established by the presumption of the thing adjudged arising from the decree of the Court of Appeals of Kentucky, to which we have referred in case No. 404. We need not, however, consider the question of res judicata upon which the court below based its conclusion, as we have in case No. 404, just announced, held entirely without reference to the plea of res judicata, that taxes in form exactly like those here in question were illegal because levied upon the property and franchise of the bank, and not upon the shares of ■ stock in the names of the shareholders. It follows, therefore, that the decree below which restrained the collection of the taxes was correct, and it is therefore.

Affirmed,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

174 U.S. 435, 19 S. Ct. 874, 43 L. Ed. 1037, 1899 U.S. LEXIS 1508, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/louisville-v-third-national-bank-scotus-1899.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack