Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Mr. Maxwell Evarts, with whom Mr. Henry S. Wardner and Mr. John G. Sargent, Attorney General of the State of Vermont, were on the brief, for appellant in No. 407.
Mr. Richard V. Lindabury, with whom Mr. Charles W. Pierson and Mr. Robert Lynn Cox were on the brief, for appellants in Nos. 409 and 410.
Mr. John G. Johnson and Mr. Frederic Jesup Stimson, with whom Mr. Lawrence M. Stockton and Mr. Harris Livermore were on the brief, for appellants in Nos. 425 and 457.
Mr. Richard Reid Rogers for appellants in No. 442.
Mr. Julien T. Davies, with whom Mr. Frederic D. McKenney was on the brief, for appellant in No. 415.
Mr. Edward Osgood Brown, with whom Mr. George Packard and Mr. Vincent J. Walsh were on the brief, submitted for appellants in Nos. 411 and 412.
Mr. Charles H. Tyler, Mr. Owen D. Young, Mr. Burton E. Eames and Mr. Randolph Frothingham for appellant, in No. 443, submitted.
Mr. C.H. Williams for appellants in No. 457.
Mr. J.B. Foraker, with whom Mr. Alton C. Dustin, Mr. D. Edward Morgan and Mr. Richard Inglis were on the brief, for appellant in No. 420.
Mr. Frederic R. Coudert for appellants in Nos. 431 and 432, submitted.
Mr. Jed. L. Washburn, with whom Mr. William D. Bailey and Mr. Oscar Mitchell were on the brief, for appellant in No. 446.
Mr. William D. Guthrie, with whom Mr. Victor Morawetz and Mr. Howard Van Sinderen were on the brief, for appellee in No. 410.
Mr. James L. Quackenbush for appellees in No. 442, submitted.
Mr. Charles A. Snow and Mr. Joseph H. Knight for appellees in No. 425 submitted.
The Solicitor General for the United States on the reargument; Mr. Solicitor General Bowers.
Supreme Court of United States.
Restored to docket for reargument May 31, 1910.
MR. JUSTICE DAY delivered the opinion of the court.
These cases involve the constitutional validity of § 38 of the act of Congress approved August 5, 1909, known as "The Corporation Tax" law. 36 Stat. c. 6, 11, 112-117.
It is contended in the first place that this section of the act is unconstitutional, because it is a revenue measure, and originated in...
NEVER MISS A DECISION. START YOUR SUBSCRIPTION.
Uncompromising quality. Enduring impact.
Your support ensures a bright future for independent legal reporting.
As you are aware we have offered this as a free subscription over the past years and we have now made it a paid service.Look forward to your continued patronage.