From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Valentine v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.

U.S.
Nov 9, 1936
299 U.S. 32 (1936)

Opinion

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA.

No. 13.

Argued October 14, 1936. Decided November 9, 1936.

Iowa Chain Store Tax Act of 1935, § 4(b), held unconstitutional. Stewart Dry Goods Co. v. Lewis, 294 U.S. 550.

Mr. Frank F. Messer and Mr. Edward L. O'Connor, Attorney General of Iowa, with whom Mrs. W.E. Wallace and John Connolly, Jr., were on the brief, for appellants.

Mr. Joseph G. Gamble, with whom Messrs. Ralph L. Read, Alden B. Howland, and Joseph F. Rosenfield were on the brief, for appellees.



Appellees brought these suits to restrain the enforcement of a statute of Iowa known as the "Chain Store Tax Act of 1935" (Iowa Code of 1935, c. 329 G-1). The District Court, composed of three judges, held that the provision of § 4(b) of the statute, imposing a tax based on gross receipts from sales according to an accumulative graduated scale, was invalid under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States as creating an arbitrary discrimination. 12 F. Supp. 760. The case comes here upon direct appeal from a final decree granting a permanent injunction. 28 U.S.C. § 380.

The decree is affirmed upon the authority of Stewart Dry Goods Co. v. Lewis, 294 U.S. 550.

Affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE BRANDEIS and MR. JUSTICE CARDOZO dissent.

MR. JUSTICE STONE took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.


Summaries of

Valentine v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.

U.S.
Nov 9, 1936
299 U.S. 32 (1936)
Case details for

Valentine v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.

Case Details

Full title:VALENTINE, CHAIRMAN OF THE IOWA STATE BOARD OF ASSESSMENT AND REVIEW, ET…

Court:U.S.

Date published: Nov 9, 1936

Citations

299 U.S. 32 (1936)

Citing Cases

Volusia County Kennel Club v. Haggard

"`The prevailing opinion commits the court to a holding that a tax upon gross sales, if laid upon a graduated…

Southern Boulevard R. Co. v. City of New York

The taxing power is not required to apportion taxes in exact proportion to the ability to pay. Metropolis…