State Ex Rel. Kansas City, Clinton & Springfield Railway Co. v. Danuser

Supreme Court of Missouri

State Ex Rel. Kansas City, Clinton & Springfield Railway Co. v. Danuser

5 S.W.2d 22, 6 S.W.2d 912, 319 Mo. 810, 1928 Mo. LEXIS 575

DecidedApril 9, 1928

StatusPublished

This text of 5 S.W.2d 22 (State Ex Rel. Kansas City, Clinton & Springfield Railway Co. v. Danuser) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State Ex Rel. Kansas City, Clinton & Springfield Railway Co. v. Danuser, 5 S.W.2d 22, 6 S.W.2d 912, 319 Mo. 810, 1928 Mo. LEXIS 575 (Mo. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

WALKER, C. J.

— This is likewise an application for a writ of certiorari to quash the records of the respondents required to be entered in the discharge of their official duties in the enforcement of the Corporation Franchise Tax Law of 1921. [Laws 1921, 1st. Ex. Sess., pp. 121-126.]

. Like contentions are made herein as in State ex rel. Mo. Pac. Railroad Co. v. Danuser, ante, page 799, in which we held the franchise tax law to be valid and quashed the w(rits of the relators therein. A like course is authorized in this case and it is so ordered.

All concur, except White and Graves, JJ., not sitting; Ragland, J., concurs in the result.

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

WALKER, C. J.

— This is likewise an application for a writ of certiorari to quash the records of the respondents required to be entered in the discharge of their official duties in the enforcement of the Corporation Franchise Tax Law of 1921. [Laws 1921, 1st. Ex. Sess., pp. 121-126.]

. Like contentions are made herein as in State ex rel. Mo. Pac. Railroad Co. v. Danuser, ante, page 799, in which we held the franchise tax law to be valid and quashed the w(rits of the relators therein. A like course is authorized in this case and it is so ordered.

All concur, except White and Graves, JJ., not sitting; Ragland, J., concurs in the result.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 S.W.2d 22, 6 S.W.2d 912, 319 Mo. 810, 1928 Mo. LEXIS 575, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-kansas-city-clinton-springfield-railway-co-v-danuser-mo-1928.