Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, 157 U.S. 429 (1895), affirmed on rehearing, 158 U.S. 601 (1895), was a landmark case of the Supreme Court of the United States.In a 5–4 decision, the Supreme Court struck down the income tax imposed by the Wilson–Gorman Tariff Act for being an unapportioned direct tax.
[22]: 37–38 Jackson's narrow interpretation of the Act set the stage for later consequential antitrust cases, including United States v. E. C. Knight Co. (1895), and it continued to influence interstate commerce law for half a century. [21]: 104, 107–108 In other cases, Jackson took a broader view of constitutional provisions.
Subsequent cases have viewed the Sixteenth Amendment as a rejection of Pollock's definition of "direct tax". The apportionment requirement again applies only to real estate and capitation taxes. Even if the Sixteenth Amendment is not viewed as narrowing the definition of direct taxes, it at least introduces an additional consideration to ...
11 comments Toggle Much needed overhaul of this article by a student of Constitutional Law subsection 1.1 My personal views on the majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions in Pollock 1.2 Arguing about how to argue
Robert John Weston Evans FBA FLSW (born 7 October 1943) is a British historian, whose speciality is the post-medieval history of Central and Eastern Europe. He was educated at Dean Close School , Cheltenham , and later at Jesus College, Cambridge .
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!
Evans v. Eaton, 16 U.S. (3 Wheat.) 454 (1818), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a patent disclosing an improved method of manufacture by means of several different improved machines should be construed to claim both the method and the improvements to the machines, but not to include the machines apart from the inventor's improvements.
Evans v. Eaton, 20 U.S. (7 Wheat.) 356 (1822), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held, chiefly, that a patent on an improved machine must clearly describe how the machine differs from the prior art. It was the fourth published Supreme Court decision on patents, [4] and the second to deal with substantive patent law. [5]