State v. Shipman
| Decision Date | 08 July 1921 |
| Docket Number | No. 22,523.,22,523. |
| Citation | State v. Shipman, 234 S.W. 60, 290 Mo. 65 (Mo. 1921) |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. TOMPKINS v. SHIPMAN. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Application by the State of.Missouri, on the relation of W. M. Tompkins for a writ of mandamus against Aubrey Shipman.On motion for judgment on the pleadings.Writ of mandamus denied.
W. V. Draffen, of Boonville, for relator.
Dorsey W. Shackleford, of Jefferson.Henry W. Chalfant, of Linn Creek, and Barney Reed, of Ulman, for respondent,
Original action in mandamus.The petition, by stipulation, was taken as and for our alternative writ, and return was duly made thereto.Relator moved for judgment on the pleadings.The cause was then taken as submitted on briefs to be filed later.Thereafter some friends of court were permitted to file briefs.The petition succinctly states most of foe facts, and reads:
The return admits that all the facts stated in the petition are true, but adds the following material facts:
The return then attacks from many angles the constitutionality of the "(Secured Debt Tax Law" upon which relator relies for his cause of action.Such of these attacks as are deemed pertinent will be noticed in the course of the opinion.By filing motion for judgment on the pleadings, relator admits all well-pleaded facts in the return, and hence the inclusion of those facts, supra.This outlines the case.
I.The statute before us in this case is article 20, chapter 119, R. S. 1919.This is the act of 1917(Session Laws of 1917, p. 539).By it the General Assembly undertook to select the following three subdivisions of property, and place them into a class for taxation, viz.:
The bond upon which relator in this case sought to pay the tax falls within the second subdivision, supra.The suit must be governed by the act of 1917, because the amendments made to article 20 of chapter 119, R. S. 1919, in 1921(Laws 1921, p. 667), were not in force at the institution of the suit.Respondent's refusal to act must be justified, if at all, by the law then in force, so that we shall construe the act of 1917, and none other.Respondent says this act is unconstitutional, and thus justifies his action.After taking these three subdivisions of property, and putting them in a single class for the purposes of taxation, the General Assembly fixed the following tax rates:
...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
State ex rel. Russell v. Highway Commission
...Simmons Hdw. Co., 109 Mo. 118; State ex inf. v. Goffee, 192 Mo. 670; Sullivan v. Bank of Harrisonville, 293 S.W. 129; State ex rel. v. Shipman, 290 Mo. 65, 234 S.W. 60; State ex inf. v. Railroad, 192 Mo. 670; Kavanaugh v. Sup. Council of Royal League, 138 S.W. 234; State ex rel. v. Higgins,......
-
State ex rel. People's Motorbus Co. of St. Louis v. Blaine
...that all taxes shall be uniform on the same class of subjects. Const. of Mo., sec. 4, Art. X; Const. of Mo., sec. 3, Art, X; State v. Shipman, 290 Mo. 65; State v. Gehner, 319 Mo. 1048; Bridge & Co. v. Blaser, 318 Mo. 384. (3) If the tax is held to be an excise or license tax, then it is in......
-
Bacon v. Ranson
...rel. v. Switzler, 143 Mo. 333; State v. Bengsch, 170 Mo. 115; Wire Co. v. Wollbrinck, 275 Mo. 357; Acts of 1931, pp. 366-7; State ex rel. v. Shipman, 234 S.W. 62; Independence v. Gates, 110 Mo. 382. (2) The Tax Act as amended is invalid because in conflict with Section 4, of Article 10, of ......
-
State ex rel. Russell v. State Highway Com'n
...Simmons Hdw. Co., 109 Mo. 118; State ex inf. v. Goffee, 192 Mo. 670; Sullivan v. Bank of Harrisonville, 293 S.W. 129; State ex rel. v. Shipman, 290 Mo. 65, 234 S.W. 60; State ex inf. v. Railroad, 192 Mo. 670; Kavanaugh v. Council of Royal League, 138 S.W. 234; State ex rel. v. Higgins, 84 M......