|
|
Bothwell v. Bingham County, 237 U.S. 642 (1915)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Bothwell v. Bingham County, 237 U.S. 642 (1915)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 237 U.S. 632, click here.
Bothwell v. Bingham County No. 266 Argued May 6, 1915 Decided June 1, 1915 237 U.S. 642
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
Syllabus
The determinative fact of whether property formerly part of the public domain of the United States is subject to taxation by the state is the absence of any beneficial interest in the land on the part of the United States at the time of the assessment.
Neither the Carey Act of August 18, 1894, nor the agreement thereunder with the State of Idaho in regard to irrigation of arid lands segregated from the public domain purports to exempt the lands from taxation or take them out of the settled rule respecting taxation by the lands acquired under public land laws.
Where proceedings to acquire title to public land have reached the point where nothing remains to be done by the entryman, and the United States has no beneficial interest therein and does not exclude the entryman from the use thereof, the entryman is regarded as the beneficial owner, and the land is subject to taxation, even though the legal title may not have been passed to him, and in this respect it is immaterial whether the title passes direct from the government or through the state, under provisions of the Carey Act.
24 Idaho 125 affirmed.
The facts, which involve the construction of the Carey Act of August 18, 1894, and the right of the state to tax property taken up thereunder by an entryman after he had become entitled to the patent, but before the patent was issues, are stated in the opinion.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Bothwell v. Bingham County, 237 U.S. 642 (1915) in 237 U.S. 642 237 U.S. 643–237 U.S. 644. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=9HSQZ5LX6YGFXQQ.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Bothwell v. Bingham County, 237 U.S. 642 (1915), in 237 U.S. 642, pp. 237 U.S. 643–237 U.S. 644. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=9HSQZ5LX6YGFXQQ.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Bothwell v. Bingham County, 237 U.S. 642 (1915). cited in 1915, 237 U.S. 642, pp.237 U.S. 643–237 U.S. 644. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=9HSQZ5LX6YGFXQQ.
|