Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Reed v. Bjornson, 253 N.W. 102.

94 citing documents.

Leighton v. City of Minneapolis 25 N.W.2d 263 Minn. 1946
Leighton v. City of Minneapolis 25 N.W.2d 263 Minn. 1946
& Loan Assn. v. Blaisdell, 290 U. S. 398 , 54 S. Ct. 231 , 78 L. ed. 413, 88 A. L. R. 1481; Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254, 258 , .
State v. Lanesboro Produce & Hatchery Co. 21 N.W.2d 792 Minn. 1946
State v. Industrial Tool & Die Works, Inc. 21 N.W.2d 31 Minn. 1945
State v. Industrial Tool & Die Works, Inc. 21 N.W.2d 31 Minn. 1945
Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254 , .
Lyons v. Spaeth 20 N.W.2d 481 Minn. 1945
Lyons v. Spaeth 20 N.W.2d 481 Minn. 1945
Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254 , .
State v. Minnesota Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n 15 N.W.2d 568 Minn. 1944
State v. Minnesota Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n 15 N.W.2d 568 Minn. 1944
Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254 , ; C. Thomas Stores Sales System, Inc. v. Spaeth, 209 Minn. 504 , .
Trustees of Hamline University v. Peacock 14 N.W.2d 773 Minn. 1944
Trustees of Hamline University v. Peacock 14 N.W.2d 773 Minn. 1944
Add to this the fact that there has been no legislation, not even since the 1906 wide-open tax amendment (cf. Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254, pp. 258-259 , -105 ), tending to limit or in any way affecting Hamline’s charter grant of immunity, and we can see no compelling reason on this score for overturning the decisions of the triers of fact.
Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation 12 N.W.2d 625 Minn. 1943
Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation 12 N.W.2d 625 Minn. 1943
This court so held in Seed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254 , .
In Re Petition of S. R. A., Inc. 7 N.W.2d 484 Minn. 1942
In Re Petition of S. R. A., Inc. 7 N.W.2d 484 Minn. 1942
As we pointed out in Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254, 257, 258 , , “the power of taxation is inherent in sovereignty.” As such, “constitutional provisions are not a grant of, but a limitation upon, this power, and except in so far as thus *492 limited it is exhaustive and embraces every conceivable subject of taxation.” As said by Mr. Justice Mitchell
State v. Northwest Airlines, Inc. 7 N.W.2d 691 Minn. 1942
Almer Railway Equipment Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation 5 N.W.2d 637 Minn. 1942
Almer Railway Equipment Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation 5 N.W.2d 637 Minn. 1942
Co. 163 Minn. 88 , ; Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254 , ; State v. Illinois Cent.
C. Thomas Stores Sales System, Inc. v. Spaeth 297 N.W. 9 Minn. 1941
C. Thomas Stores Sales System, Inc. v. Spaeth 297 N.W. 9 Minn. 1941
Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254 , .
Dimke v. Finke 295 N.W. 75 Minn. 1940
Dimke v. Finke 295 N.W. 75 Minn. 1940
Hildebrandt v. Fitzgerald, 117 Minn. 192 , ; Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254 , ; Muller v. Theo.
National Tea Co. v. State 286 N.W. 360 Minn. 1939
National Tea Co. v. State 286 N.W. 360 Minn. 1939
XIV, § 1, it is provided that, “no State shall * * deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Minn. Const, art. 9, § 1, provides: “Taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of subjects, * * In Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254 , , we held that "these provisions of the federal and state constitutions impose identical restrictions upon the legislative poAver of the state in respect to classification for purposes of taxation.
State v. Aitkin County Farm Land Co. 284 N.W. 63 Minn. 1939
State v. Aitkin County Farm Land Co. 284 N.W. 63 Minn. 1939
In other words, the constitutional provisions are not a grant of, but a limitation upon, this power, and except insofar as thus limited it is exhaustive and embraces every conceivable subject of taxation.” Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254, 257, 258 , , and cases there cited.
State Ex Rel. Equity Farms, Inc. v. Hubbard 280 N.W. 9 Minn. 1938
State Ex Rel. Equity Farms, Inc. v. Hubbard 280 N.W. 9 Minn. 1938
Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254, 265 , ; Watson v. State Comptroller, 254 U. S. 122 , 41 S. Ct. 43 , 65 L. ed. 170.
Cherokee State Bank v. Wallace 279 N.W. 410 Minn. 1938
Cherokee State Bank v. Wallace 279 N.W. 410 Minn. 1938
Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254 , .
510 Groveland Avenue, Inc. v. Erickson 276 N.W. 287 Minn. 1937
510 Groveland Avenue, Inc. v. Erickson 276 N.W. 287 Minn. 1937
They recently had consideration here in Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254 , , sustaining the state income tax law (L. 1933, c. 405).
Johnson v. Richardson 266 N.W. 867 Minn. 1936
Johnson v. Richardson 266 N.W. 867 Minn. 1936
In Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254, 261 , , it was stated that “our uniformity clause is no more restrictive than the fourteenth amendment.” It would follow then that if § 2150 does not offend against the provisions of the fourteenth amendment neither does it violate the uniformity provision of our constitution.
Bemis Bro. Bag Company v. Wallace 266 N.W. 690 Minn. 1936
Bemis Bro. Bag Company v. Wallace 266 N.W. 690 Minn. 1936
Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254, 257 , .
State Ex Rel. Matteson v. Luecke 260 N.W. 206 Minn. 1935
State Ex Rel. Matteson v. Luecke 260 N.W. 206 Minn. 1935
No. 78, 180 Minn. 44, 47 , ; Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254 , .
Sloan v. City of Duluth 259 N.W. 393 Minn. 1935
Sloan v. City of Duluth 259 N.W. 393 Minn. 1935
Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254 , .
Apartment Operators Assn. v. City of Minneapolis 254 N.W. 443 Minn. 1934
Apartment Operators Assn. v. City of Minneapolis 254 N.W. 443 Minn. 1934
Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254, 264 , , and cases cited.
Thompson-Parker Holding Co. v. Bjornson 253 N.W. 110 Minn. 1934
Thompson-Parker Holding Co. v. Bjornson 253 N.W. 110 Minn. 1934
This case is controlled by Reed v. Bjornson, 191 Minn. 254 , .

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by