Rinehart v. Reliance Ins. Co., 3 Div. 942
| Court | Supreme Court of Alabama |
| Writing for the Court | LAWSON; LIVINGSTON |
| Citation | 273 Ala. 535,142 So.2d 254 |
| Parties | Edmon L. RINEHART, Superintendent of Insurance, v. RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY. |
| Docket Number | 3 Div. 942 |
| Decision Date | 22 March 1962 |
Page 254
v.
RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY.
Rehearing Denied June 21, 1962.
[273 Ala. 536]
Page 255
MacDonald Gallion, Atty. Gen., and David W. Clark, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.Mead, Norman & Fitzpatrick, Birmingham, for appellee.
LAWSON, Justice.
Reliance Insurance Company, a foreign corporation, filed its complaint in the Circuit Court of Montgomery County against the Superintendent of Insurance of the State of Alabama, as authorized by § 890, Title 51, Code 1940, as amended, to recover back 'premium tax' in the sum of $2634.13 which it had paid under protest for the calendar year 1958.
From a judgment in favor of the plaintiff below, the Superintendent of Insurance appealed to this court.
Under the provisions of § 816, Title 51, Code 1940, as amended, hereinafter referred to as § 816, foreign insurance companies doing business in this state must pay an [273 Ala. 537] 'annual premium tax,' the amount of which is provided at a per centum of the premiums received for business done in this state. The manner in which that tax is to be computed and paid is spelled out in § 816 in the following language:
'* * * Any foreign insurance company beginning business in the state of Alabama after January 1 of any calendar year shall, on or before the first day of March of the year succeeding the year of its entry, remit, with its statement to the superintendent of insurance, the taxes as required by this article on business written in Alabama for the preceding calendar year or fraction thereof in which it began business as a tax for such first year or fractional year; provided, that after any such insurance company has been operating in this state for one complete calendar year, it shall compute its business done in this state during said year and upon this basis it shall pay its taxes for that and the succeeding year. Each succeeding year the tax shall be based and paid upon business done in Alabama for the preceding calendar year, it being the intent and meaning of this article that such insurance companies shall pay their premium taxes on March 1 for such current year, except that the premium taxes for the first and second year shall be paid in the manner herein specifically provided * * *.'
During the calendar year 1957 and for many years prior thereto, Fire Association of Philadelphia and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Reliance Insurance Company of Philadelphia, both Pennsylvania corporations, did business in Alabama. Those two companies merged as of January 1, 1958. Under the agreement of merger, Fire Association of Philadelphia continued as the surviving corporation under the name of Reliance Insurance Company.
On or before March 1, 1958, Reliance Insurance Company made a payment of 1958 premium tax to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Alabama Dept. of Public Safety v. Barbour, 2070306.
...from the language used, the reason and necessity for the act and the purpose sought to be obtained. See Rinehart v. Reliance Ins. Co., 273 Ala. 535, 538, 142 So.2d 254, 256 "In an earlier driver license case requiring judicial interpretation of a statute, the Court held there is an inherent......
-
Wright v. Turner
...evil (conflicts of interest) sought to be remedied, and the object and purpose sought to be obtained." Rinehart v. Reliance Insurance Co., 273 Ala. 535, 538, 142 So.2d 254, 256 (1962); accord, Cole v. Gullatt, 241 Ala. 669, 672, 4 So.2d 412, 415 The appellees, as public officials, come with......
-
Pool v. State, 5 Div. 570
...from the language used, the reason and necessity for the act and the purpose sought to be obtained. See Rinehart v. Reliance Ins. Co., 273 Ala. 535, 538, 142 So.2d 254, 256 (1962)." Shelton v. Wright, 439 So.2d 55, 57 (Ala.1983). The stated purpose of the Drug Crimes Amendments Act of 1987 ......
-
State ex rel. Allison v. Farris, 1140034.
...of statutory construction is to ascertain ... the object and purpose sought to be obtained.’ ” (quoting Rinehart v. Reliance Ins. Co., 273 Ala. 535, 538, 142 So.2d 254, 256 (1962) )). The interpretation of § 17–4–1 urged by Farris would defeat, not further, the purpose of the statute, which......
-
Alabama Dept. of Public Safety v. Barbour, 2070306.
...from the language used, the reason and necessity for the act and the purpose sought to be obtained. See Rinehart v. Reliance Ins. Co., 273 Ala. 535, 538, 142 So.2d 254, 256 "In an earlier driver license case requiring judicial interpretation of a statute, the Court held there is an inherent......
-
Wright v. Turner
...evil (conflicts of interest) sought to be remedied, and the object and purpose sought to be obtained." Rinehart v. Reliance Insurance Co., 273 Ala. 535, 538, 142 So.2d 254, 256 (1962); accord, Cole v. Gullatt, 241 Ala. 669, 672, 4 So.2d 412, 415 The appellees, as public officials, come with......
-
Pool v. State, 5 Div. 570
...from the language used, the reason and necessity for the act and the purpose sought to be obtained. See Rinehart v. Reliance Ins. Co., 273 Ala. 535, 538, 142 So.2d 254, 256 (1962)." Shelton v. Wright, 439 So.2d 55, 57 (Ala.1983). The stated purpose of the Drug Crimes Amendments Act of 1987 ......
-
State ex rel. Allison v. Farris, 1140034.
...of statutory construction is to ascertain ... the object and purpose sought to be obtained.’ ” (quoting Rinehart v. Reliance Ins. Co., 273 Ala. 535, 538, 142 So.2d 254, 256 (1962) )). The interpretation of § 17–4–1 urged by Farris would defeat, not further, the purpose of the statute, which......