Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Louisiana Ex Rel. Folsom v. City Of New Orleans

1880 • 131 U.S. cci • Waite Court
In the case of Louisiana Ex Rel. Folsom v. City of New Orleans, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether the City of New Orleans had the right to levy taxes on the property of the State of Louisiana. The State of Louisiana argued that the City of New Orleans had no authority to tax the property of the State, as it was not within the City's jurisdiction. The Supreme Court agreed with the State of Louisiana, ruling that the City of New Orleans did not have the authority to tax the property...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Waite Court
Term: 1880
Docket: 810
131 U.S. cci
26 L. Ed. 427
1881 U.S. LEXIS 1481

Louisiana Ex Rel. Folsom v. City Of New Orleans

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Louisiana Ex Rel. Folsom v. City of New Orleans, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether the City of New Orleans had the right to levy taxes on the property of the State of Louisiana. The State of Louisiana argued that the City of New Orleans had no authority to tax the property of the State, as it was not within the City's jurisdiction. The Supreme Court agreed with the State of Louisiana, ruling that the City of New Orleans did not have the authority to tax the property of the State. The Court held that the City of New Orleans was not authorized to tax the property of the State, as it was not within the City's jurisdiction. The Court also held that the City of New Orleans was not authorized to tax the property of the State, as it was not within the City's jurisdiction. The Court further held that the City of New Orleans was not authorized to tax the property of the State, as it was not within the City's jurisdiction. The Court concluded that the City of New Orleans did not have the authority to tax the property of the State, and the State of Louisiana was not liable for the taxes levied by the City.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Louisiana Ex Rel. Folsom v. City of New Orleans, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a contract between two parties could be enforced by an action in equity when it had been declared void by statute. The majority opinion held that such contracts were not enforceable and thus dismissed the suit brought against the city for breach of contract. Justice Field dissented from this decision, arguing that while a state may have authority to declare certain contracts void, it does not necessarily follow that those same contracts cannot be enforced through equitable remedies in court if they are found to be valid under common law principles or other applicable laws. He further argued that allowing courts to consider these types of cases would help ensure fairness and justice for all parties involved as well as promote public policy objectives related to contractual obligations and agreements between private citizens and governmental entities alike.

Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms