SOUTHERN OPERATING COMPANY
v.
HAYS, COUNTY CLERK OF HAMILTON COUNTY, TENNESSEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Southern Operating Company challenged a Tennessee state and county privilege tax through an injunction against collection, and the Supreme Court reversed the lower court's decision, finding the injunction proper based on the same grounds that governed a related case decided immediately before it. The Court rejected the lower court's distinction that state taxes could not be enjoined and required payment under protest instead, as the state's attorney general conceded the point during oral argument.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Chief Justice White delivered the, opinion of the court.
This case was brought to enjoin the collection of a State and County Privilege Tax upon the same facts as those which were involved in the case just decided. The two cases in both the trial and the court below were heard together and they were here argued at the same time. The court below in disposing of this case with one exception placed its conclusion upon the same grounds upon which it decided the previous’ case. The one exception referred to was a declaration that the trial court erred in granting the injunction so far as the state tax was concerned because there was no authority to enjoin the collection of such a tax and the only right was to pay under protest and sue to recover. Whatever difference between the two cases would otherwise result from that point of view need not be considered since the Attorney General of the State in the argument at bar in express terms states that that question is not insisted upon. It being thus removed from consideration, a complete identity between the two cases results and for the reasons given in the previous case the judgment in this base must also be reversed.
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Santa Cruz Fruit Packing Co., 91 F.2d 790 (9th Cir. 1937)…ed in interstate and foreign commerce and consequently are validly subject to congressional regulation under the Act. Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1, 6 L.Ed. 23; Heyman v. Hays, 236 U.S. 178, 35 S.Ct. 403, 59 L.Ed. 527; Southern Operating Co. v. Hays, 236 U.S. 188, 35 S.Ct. 405, 59 L.Ed. 531; Sioux Remedy Co. v. Cope, 235 U.S. 197, 35 S.Ct. 57, 59 L.Ed. 193. “The fact that the respondent is also engaged in the processing, production, or manufacture of canned goods does not divest its operations in selling an…