Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Supreme Court· 12/5/1921

Rafferty v. Smith, Bell & Co.

Citations

  • 257 U.S. 226
  • 42 S. Ct. 71
  • 66 L. Ed. 208
  • 1921 U.S. LEXIS 1334

Syllabus

<p>1. Taxes on the value of exports from the Philippine Islands collected under a Philippine Act, effective July 1, 1916, while duties on such exports were forbidden by the Act of Congress of Augyst 29, 1916, c. 416, 39 Stat. 545, were legalized, ratified and confirmed by the congressional Act of June 5,1920, c. 253, 41 Stat. 1015, 1025. P. 231.</p> <p>2. This was within the power of Congress (United States v. Heinszen cfe Co., 206 IJ. S. 370,) even where the parties taxed had obtained judgments for restitution, in the Supreme Court of the Philippines, before the date of the ratifying statute but where the judgments at that date were still reviewable and subsequently were - reviewed in this court’by certiorari. P. 232.</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • retroactive validation by Congress of duties unlawfully collected some four years earlier held constitutional
  • retroactively applying a statute that legalized and ratified taxes collected
  • restitution of taxes allegedly illegally collected
  • restitution of taxes allegedly illegally collected

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: McReynolds, Clarke

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

39 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Rafferty v. Smith, Bell & Co.

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

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.