TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Auditor of Floyd County v. New Albany & Salem Railroad

The Auditor and Treasurer of Floyd County v. The New Albany and Salem Railroad Company

Auditor of Floyd Cnty. v. New Albany & Salem R.R., 11 Ind. 570 (1858)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Indiana Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
November 28, 1858
Judges
Davison
Citations
11 Ind. 570
Summary
APPEAL from the Floyd Court of Common Pleas.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Davison

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Davison, J.

The appellee, who was the plaintiff, filed a complaint, in the form of an affidavit, wherein it is alleged, inter alia, that by assessments of the auditor of Floyd county for the years 1855 and 1856, said railroad company is required to pay a tax on all her property, both personal and real, when such assessment should have been alone upon the stock of the company at its current price. The complaint makes said auditor and treasurer defendants, prays that the auditor may be directed to assess the company’s stock, and that the treasurer be enjoined from proceeding to collect the tax now assessed upon their real and personal property. The defendants appeared and waived service of process. And the cause being heard, the Court granted the relief sought, &c. The question involved in the record before us, is fully settled in The State v. Hamilton, 5 Ind. R. 310. There it was held that the term stock, where it occurs in § 32 of an act providing for the assessment of property, &c., 1 R. S. p. 113, includes, not subscriptions of stock, but the actual, tangible property of the railroad company. That case is decisive of the one at bar, and upon its authority, the judgment of the Common Pleas must be reversed.

Per Curiam.—The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1882–1883: 11898–1899: 118822026peak 1882 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Commonwealth v. Standard Oil Co.101 Pa. 119 (1882)
  2. Zimmerman v. Gaumer53 N.E. 829 (Ind. 1899)

Most recent

  1. Zimmerman v. Gaumer53 N.E. 829 (Ind. 1899)
  2. Commonwealth v. Standard Oil Co.101 Pa. 119 (1882)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list