Oulton v. San Francisco Savings Union

Supreme Court

Oulton v. San Francisco Savings Union

154 U.S. 591, 14 S. Ct. 1208, 1873 U.S. LEXIS 1366

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedApril 28, 1873

DocketNo. 206

StatusPublished

This text of 154 U.S. 591 (Oulton v. San Francisco Savings Union) 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

Oulton v. San Francisco Savings Union, 154 U.S. 591, 14 S. Ct. 1208, 1873 U.S. LEXIS 1366 (1873).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Clifford

delivered the opinion of the court.

Taxes were collected of the bank in this case by the defendant, to the amount of three thousand and sixty-six dollars and sixty-three cents, which the bank paid under protest, and brought this suit in the state court to recover back the amount, and the suit, on motion of the defendant, was removed into the Circuit Court.

Suffice it to say, without entering into particulars, that the pleadings, proceedings, and evidence in this case are substantially the same as in the preceding case, and the court rendered judgment for the plaintiffs for the whole amount claimed, and the defendant sued out the present writ of error, and for the reasons assigned in the preceding case the judgment must be reversed.

Judgment reversed and the cause remanded with directions to ■ issue a new venire. Reversed.

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

Mr. Justice Clifford

delivered the opinion of the court.

Taxes were collected of the bank in this case by the defendant, to the amount of three thousand and sixty-six dollars and sixty-three cents, which the bank paid under protest, and brought this suit in the state court to recover back the amount, and the suit, on motion of the defendant, was removed into the Circuit Court.

Suffice it to say, without entering into particulars, that the pleadings, proceedings, and evidence in this case are substantially the same as in the preceding case, and the court rendered judgment for the plaintiffs for the whole amount claimed, and the defendant sued out the present writ of error, and for the reasons assigned in the preceding case the judgment must be reversed.

Judgment reversed and the cause remanded with directions to ■ issue a new venire. Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

154 U.S. 591, 14 S. Ct. 1208, 1873 U.S. LEXIS 1366, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oulton-v-san-francisco-savings-union-scotus-1873.