DICKINSON, COMPTROLLER OF FLORIDA
v.
FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF HOMESTEAD ET AL.

U.S. | 1969-01-20
No. 741
Mr. Justice Stewart is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted., Mr. Justice Fortas took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
393 U.S. 409 Supreme Court of the United States (1969) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.

Mr. Justice Stewart is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.

Mr. Justice Fortas took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • United States v. State Bd. OF Equalization, 639 F.2d 458 (9th Cir. 1980)
    …ses, and thus the tax could not be imposed on sales of tangible personal property to national banks. The following year, the Court struck down sales and other taxes imposed on national banks by the state of Florida. Dickinson v. First National Bank, 393 U.S. 409, 89 S.Ct. 685, 21 L.Ed.2d 634 (1969). These decisions created great difficulties for states in their attempts to equalize the tax burdens of banks and other businesses and led to the enactment of Pub. L.No.91-156, 83 Stat. 434 (1969), which amended…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw