In the case of Durkee v. Board of Liquidation, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether the state of Louisiana had the right to tax the property of a non-resident. The plaintiff, Durkee, was a non-resident of Louisiana who owned property in the state. The state had imposed a tax on the property, and Durkee argued that the tax was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court held that the tax was constitutional. The Court reasoned that the state had the right to impose taxes on non-residents, as long as the tax was not discriminatory. The Court noted that the tax was not discriminatory, as it was imposed on all non-residents regardless of their state of residence. The Court also noted that the tax was not excessive, as it was based on the value of the property. The Court concluded that the tax was constitutional, and that the state of Louisiana had the right to impose it on Durkee's property. The Court also noted that the tax was not excessive, and that it was not discriminatory. As such, the Court held that the tax was constitutional and that the state of Louisiana had the right to impose it on Durkee's property.

In Durkee v. Board of Liquidation, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a state-created board had the authority to issue bonds in order to pay off debts incurred by its predecessor. The majority opinion held that the board did have this power and could use it for such purposes. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision, arguing that while states may create boards with certain powers, those powers must be explicitly stated in their enabling legislation or else they cannot be assumed. He argued further that since there was no explicit mention of bond issuance within the relevant statute creating this particular board, then it should not be allowed to do so without express authorization from Congress or another competent legislative body.