PRATT & LAMBERT, INC., Claimant, v. STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.

Case summary

Claimant sought recovery of franchise taxes and initial fees allegedly wrongfully collected by the Secretary of State. The court denied the claim, finding claimant had an adequate remedy at law in courts of general jurisdiction, citing prior opinions.

Claim type: Tax Refund

Cases cited: The Moline Plow Company v. The State of Illinois; Geo. P. Ide & Co., Inc., v. The State of Illinois

AI-generated summary from the opinion text — may contain errors. The opinion text and PDF above are the official record.

Headnotes

FRANCHISE TAX-when no award will be made. The decision in this case

Rehearing denied February 1d, 1929. FRANCHISE TAX-when no award will be made. The decision in this case POLLANSBEE, SHOREY & SCHUPP, for claimant. OSCAR E. CARLSTROM, Attorney General; DAVID J. KADYK, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE CLARDY delivered the opinion of the court:

The claimant, a New York Corporation, seeks to recover on account of franchise taxes and initial fees alleged to be wrongfully collected by the Secretary of State.

This court is of the opinion that claimant had an adequate remedy at law in courts of general jurisdiction as expressed by this court in the opinion filed in the case of The Moline Plow Company v. The State of Illinois, and in the case of Geo. P. Ide & Co., Inc., v. The State of Illinois.

Therefore it is recommended by this court that this claim be disallowed.

On February 18, 1929, upon petition for rehearing the following additional opinion was filed: This is a case before this court on rehearing. The court is of the opinion that the records fail to disclose any reason for a change in the opinion heretofore filed in said claim.

It is therefore recommended by this court that petition for rehearing be denied.