From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dyer v. City of Melrose

U.S.
Jan 24, 1910
215 U.S. 594 (1910)

Opinion

ERROR TO THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS.

No. 93.

Argued January 20, 1910. Decided January 24, 1910.

A judgment of the state court sustaining a tax on property of an officer of the United States Navy affirmed on the authority of previous cases. 197 Mass. 99, affirmed.

As stated in the brief of defendant in error:
"This case presents the single question whether money which the plaintiff in error has received as salary or emoluments from the Federal Government, after being so received and deposited in national banks, subject to check, is exempt from taxation by local authorities in Massachusetts, on the principle that a State cannot lay a tax upon an office under the Government of the United States, nor upon any means or instruments used solely for the maintenance of the Federal Government or the performance of any of its functions."

Mr. Chester M. Pratt for plaintiff in error.

Mr. Claude L. Allen for defendant in error.


Judgment affirmed with costs. Hibernia Savings Society v. San Francisco, 200 U.S. 310; McIntosh v. Aubrey, 185 U.S. 122; Railroad Co. v. Peniston, 18 Wall. 5; case below, Dyer v. Melrose, 197 Mass. 99.


Summaries of

Dyer v. City of Melrose

U.S.
Jan 24, 1910
215 U.S. 594 (1910)
Case details for

Dyer v. City of Melrose

Case Details

Full title:DYER v . CITY OF MELROSE

Court:U.S.

Date published: Jan 24, 1910

Citations

215 U.S. 594 (1910)

Citing Cases

Matter of Reeves v. Crownshield

Thus it has been held that a tax on the property of a Federal employee may be applied to his salary which he…

James v. Dravo Contracting Co.

Forbes v. Gracey, 94 U.S. 762; Group No. 1 Oil Corp. v. Bass, 283 U.S. 279; Indian Territory Oil Co. v.…