Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
DEPOSIT BANK OF OWENSBORO v. OWENSBORO, 1899 — 173 U.S. 662 · caselaw · US
Property · MBE-tested
DEPOSIT BANK OF OWENSBORO v. OWENSBORO
173 U.S. 66243 L. Ed. 850·Supreme Court of the United States·1899
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
DEPOSIT BANK OF OWENSBORO v. OWENSBORO.
ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KENTUCKY.
No. 149.
Argued February 27, 28, 1899.
Decided April 3, 1899.
Citizens’ Savings Sank of Owensboro v. Owensboro, ante, 636, followed,
This case was argued with the Citizens’ Savings Bank case.
Mr. W. T. Ellis for plaintiff in error.
Mr. Chapeze Wathen and Mr. J. D. Atchison for defendants in error.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Justice White]
Mr. Justice White
delivered the opinion of the court,
The relief sought by the plaintiff in error was the nullity of certain taxes levied by the city of Owensboro for the years 1893 and 1894. The grounds . upon which this relief was prayed are in all material respects like unto those relied on in the two cases against the city of Owensboro, just decided. The charter and an amendment extending the same were both enacted after the act of 1856.
Indeed, this case along with the other two were disposed of by the Kentucky Court of Appeals in the same opinion, because of the identity of the questions presented,
For reasons given in the opinion in Citizens’ Savings Bank of Owensboro v. Owensboro, ante, 636, this term, the decree is Affirmed.