VAN SLYKE
v.
WISCONSIN; BAGNALL V. SAME
Mr. Chief Justice Chase delivered the opinion of the court.
The judgment of the Supreme Court of the State of Wisconsin, which asserts the right of that State to tax the shares of stockholders in national banking associations within its limits, is affirmed. The case before us is governed by the cases of National Bank v. Commonwealth, 9 Wall. 353, in which this court affirmed the judgment of the Court of Appeals of Kentucky, and Lionberger v. Rouse, 9 Wall. 468, in which we affirmed the judgment of the Supreme Court of Missouri on questions substantially the same as those in this case. We think it unnecessary to restate the-reasons by which those decisions were sustained. Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Aberdeen Bank v. Chehalis Cnty., 166 U.S. 440 (U.S. 1897)…d, therefore, [*446] that Congress intended to prohibit this mode of collecting a tax which they expressly permitted the States to levy.” This case was followed in Bell's Gap Railroad v. Pennsylvania, 134 U. S. 232, 239, and Van Slyke v. Wisconsin, 154 U. S. 581; and its doctrine, that-the statutory appointment of the bank to pay the whole tax as agent of the stockholders, is not inconsistent with the Federal law pertaining to national banks, was correctly interpreted and applied by the state court to the c…
-
Covington v. First Nat'l Bank of Covington, 198 U.S. 100 (U.S. 1905)…y, which by the law, is operative to enforce preexisting obligations. It may be admitted that section 5219 permits the State to require the bank to pay the tax for the shareholders. National Bank v. Commonwealth, 9 Wall. 353; Van Slyke v. Wisconsin, 154 U. S. 581; Aberdeen Bank v. Chehalis County, 166 U. S. 440. But there is nothing in the general statutes of Kentucky before the act of March 21, 1900, specifically requiring national banks to return shares of stock in the corporation when such shares are hel…
-
Citizens Nat'l Bank v. Commonwealth of Ky. for the Use & Benefit of Boyle Cnty., 217 U.S. 443 (U.S. 1910)…and secure an assessment, and in imposing upon the bank a liability for,the tax so assessed against the shareholders, the act only follows .the well-settled procedure sanctioned in National Bank v. Commonwealth, 9 Wall. 353; Van Slyke v. Wisconsin, 154 U. S. 581, and Aberdeen Bank v. Chehalis County, 166 U. S. 440. That the third section does not impose a liability upon’ either the domestic shareholders or the bank which did not exist before under the prior law'of the' State, was settled by the cáse of Sco…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Nat'l Bank v. Commonwealth, 9 Wall. 353 (U.S. 1869)
- Lionberger v. Rouse, 9 Wall. 468 (U.S. 1869)