Third Nat. Bank v. Stone

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kentucky

Third Nat. Bank v. Stone

88 F. 990, 1898 U.S. App. LEXIS 2872

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kentucky

DecidedJune 4, 1898

DocketNos. 6,573 and 6,574

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 88 F. 990 (Third Nat. Bank 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

Third Nat. Bank v. Stone, 88 F. 990, 1898 U.S. App. LEXIS 2872 (circtdky 1898).

Pincite

Opinion

TAFT, Circuit Judge.

These cases present the same question which arose in the case of Louisville Banking Co. v. Same Defendants (already decided) 88 Fed. 988. The suit against the city of Louisville relates to the taxes under the revenue act of 1892 for the years 1893 and 1894, and the suit against Stone and others and the city of Louisville relates to the taxes for 1895, 1896, 1897, and 1898. In the prohibition suit brought by the Third National Bank against the judge of the police court, to which the city of Louisville became a party on appeal, it was held by the court of appeals of Kentucky (31 S. W. 1013) that the Third National Bank, by its formal acceptance of the provisions of the Hewitt act, had acquired a contract right, irrevocable by the state, exempting it from all taxes except those provided under the Hewitt act, and that the license tax imposed by the city of Louisville under a statute of the state was therefore a violation of the contract, and void under the constitution of the United States. The demurrers to the bills are therefore overruled, and the motions for preliminary injunction against the defendants are granted.

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

TAFT, Circuit Judge.

These cases present the same question which arose in the case of Louisville Banking Co. v. Same Defendants (already decided) 88 Fed. 988. The suit against the city of Louisville relates to the taxes under the revenue act of 1892 for the years 1893 and 1894, and the suit against Stone and others and the city of Louisville relates to the taxes for 1895, 1896, 1897, and 1898. In the prohibition suit brought by the Third National Bank against the judge of the police court, to which the city of Louisville became a party on appeal, it was held by the court of appeals of Kentucky (31 S. W. 1013) that the Third National Bank, by its formal acceptance of the provisions of the Hewitt act, had acquired a contract right, irrevocable by the state, exempting it from all taxes except those provided under the Hewitt act, and that the license tax imposed by the city of Louisville under a statute of the state was therefore a violation of the contract, and void under the constitution of the United States. The demurrers to the bills are therefore overruled, and the motions for preliminary injunction against the defendants are granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

88 F. 990, 1898 U.S. App. LEXIS 2872, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/third-nat-bank-v-stone-circtdky-1898.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack