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

State Board Of Assessors v. Comptoir National D'escompte

• 1903 • 191 U.S. 388 • Fuller Court
In the 1903 case of State Board of Assessors v. Comptoir National D'Escompte, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of a French banking corporation, Comptoir National d'Escompte de Paris (CNEP). The issue at hand was whether or not CNEP's New Orleans branch should be taxed by Louisiana on its capital stock and real estate located outside the state. The court held that it was unconstitutional for Louisiana to tax property owned by CNEP that wasn't within its jurisdiction. This decision upheld...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 Fuller Court
Term: 1903
Docket: 157
191 U.S. 388
24 S. Ct. 109
48 L. Ed. 232
1903 U.S. LEXIS 1460
Argued: Oct 28, 1903

State Board Of Assessors v. Comptoir National D'escompte

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the 1903 case of State Board of Assessors v. Comptoir National D'Escompte, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of a French banking corporation, Comptoir National d'Escompte de Paris (CNEP). The issue at hand was whether or not CNEP's New Orleans branch should be taxed by Louisiana on its capital stock and real estate located outside the state. The court held that it was unconstitutional for Louisiana to tax property owned by CNEP that wasn't within its jurisdiction. This decision upheld principles established in previous cases such as Delaware Railroad Tax Case and Pittsburgh & Southern Coal Co. v Bates which stated that states could only tax property within their borders unless there is explicit consent from Congress allowing them to do otherwise.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for the case of State Board of Assessors v. Comptoir National D'Escompte, Justice Harlan argued that Louisiana's tax on debts owed to foreign creditors was not unconstitutional. He contended that this taxation did not violate any treaty between France and the United States nor did it infringe upon federal power over foreign commerce or impair obligations under contracts. The justice believed that states have a right to levy taxes within their jurisdiction unless explicitly prohibited by constitutional law or treaties with other nations. Furthermore, he asserted that if such state-imposed taxes were deemed unconstitutional simply because they affected foreign commerce indirectly, then many forms of legitimate state taxation would be invalidated as well since they could also potentially affect interstate and international trade in some way.

Opinion written by Justice WRDay
Decided: Nov 30, 1903
PDF viewer is not available.
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