1 Hit in 0.049 sec

Vendor and Purchaser: Contract: Breach: Action

1907 Michigan law review  
Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the mid--seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries. We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non--commercial purposes. Read more about Early Journal
more » ... out Early Journal Content at JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not--for--profit organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please contact RECENT IMPORTANT DECISIONS RECENT IMPORTANT DECISIONS RECENT IMPORTANT DECISIONS I68, in support of its view. In support of the contention that the statute provided for taking property without due process of law, two arguments were advanced: (I) that a tax on sales is really a tax on property and that, therefore, the act, as applied to the shares of a foreign corporation owned by now-residents, is invalid, and (2) the adoption of the face value of the shares as the basis of the tax, renders it invalid. The Court answered the first of these two objections as follows: "A sale depends in fact on the law of the state where it takes place for its validity and, in the courts of that state, at least, for the mode of proof. * * * Therefore the state may make parties pay for the help of its laws, as against the objection," On the second point the Court said that here again equality must yield to practical consideration and usage. The Court also held that the sale which took place was not interstate commerce. In a recent case, the New York Court of Appeals, construing an amendment to the above act, placed its own limits upon the power of the legislature to depart from the actual value of the stock in the assessment of the tax. (See next note.) TAXATION-VALIDITY OF STOCK TRANSFER TAX-EQUALITY AND UNI- FORMITY.-New York Laws I905, p. 474, c. 24I, ? 315, which imposes a tax on sales of stock of domestic and foreign corporations of two cents "on each one hundred dollars of face value or fraction thereof," was amended by Laws i906, p. ioo8, c. 414, so as to impose a tax of two cents per share on the sale of all shares of the face value of one hundred dollars, and of all shares of the face value of any fraction thereof. The amendment was held unconstitutional. People ex rel. Farrington v. Mensching (I907), -N. Y.
doi:10.2307/1272657 fatcat:lydsoifbq5bghblbe6lq7k6hfa