State v. Philadelphia Underwriters
Citations
- 112 La. 47
- 36 So. 221
- 1904 La. LEXIS 367
Syllabus
<p>FOREIGN INSURANCE COMPANIES — LICENSE FEES.</p> <p>1. Where two nonresident insurance companies paid their respective state licenses for the years 1901 and 1902, based upon the amount of annual premiums earned during the preceding year, license fees for the same years cannot be required from their joint agents issuing their joint policies under a certain name or style, where evidence shows that said companies had made due returns for the years 1900 and 1901, to the Secretary of State, of all premiums earned, and that the premiums received on the said joint policies were included in the totals. License taxes on insurance business are based on amount of premiums, and not on the number of agencies.</p> <p>Provosty, J., dissenting.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “[T]he plaintiffs’ complaint does not allege an associational burden for purposes of a First Amendment claim.”
- “In short, in light of the absence of any material factual difference or doctrinal shifts, the Court concludes that the Supreme Court’s summary affirmance in Williams is binding precedent that requires dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Land, Yosts
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.