Skip to main content
· 3/15/1897

Henderson Bridge Co. v. Kentucky

Citations

  • 166 U.S. 150
  • 17 S. Ct. 532
  • 41 L. Ed. 953
  • 1897 U.S. LEXIS 2016

Syllabus

<p>The Henderson Bridge Company was a corporation created by the Commonwealth of Kentucky for the purpose of erecting and operating a railroad bridge, with its approaches, over the Ohio Biver between the city of Henderson, in Kentucky, and the Indiana shore. It owned 9.46 miles of railroad and .65 of a mile of siding, making its railroad connections in Indiana, which property was assessed for taxation in that State, at $627,660. The length of the'bridge in the two States, measured by feet, was one third in Indiana and two thirds in Kentucky. The tangible property of the company was assessed in Henderson -County, Kentucky, at $649,735.54. From the evidence before them, the Board of Valuation afld Assessment placed the value of the company’s entire property at $2,900,000, and deducted therefrom $627,660 for the tangible property assessed in Indiana, which left $2,272,340, of which two thirds, or $1,514,893, was held to be the entire value of the property in Kentucky. Krom this, $649,735.54, the value of the tangible property in Henderson County, was deducted, and the remainder, $865,157.46, was fixed by the Board as the value of the company’s franchise. Prom the total value, $1,385,107 was deducted for the tangible and intangible property in Indiana, and the taxes in Kentucky were levied on $1,514,893' of tangible and intangible property in that State. The company paid the tax on the tangible property ($2762.08), and refused to pay the tax on the intangible property ($3675.91). This action was brought to recover it. The Court of Appeals held that the Commonwealth was entitled to recover it. Held,</p> <p>(1) That the company was chartered by the State of Kentucky to build and operate a bridge and the State could properly include the franchises it had granted in the valuation of the company’s property for taxation;</p> <p>(2) That the tax was not a tax on thé interstate business carried on over or by means of the bridge, because the bridge company did not transact such

Judges: Fullee, White, Field, Harlan, Brown

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.