en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brushaber_v._Union_Pacific_Railroad_Co.

Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., 240 U.S. 1 (1916), was a landmark United States ... In the controversial 1895 case of Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust ...

supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/240/1

Brushaber v. ... Union Pacific Railroad Company ... Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., 157 U. S. 429. In this case -- that of a stockholder against a corporation  ...

famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/CourtCases/BrushaberVUnionPacRR240US1.htm

Mar 14, 2010 ... You might want to go back and review Pollock v. Farmer's Loan and Trust Company, 157 U.S. 429, 158 U.S. 601 (1895) again to refresh your memory on this monumental ... Union Pacific Railroad, said in the majority opinion:.

caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/240/1.html

As a stockholder of the Union Pacific Railroad Company, the appellant filed his bill ... we at once say that in view of these averments and the ruling in Pollock v.

www.givemeliberty.org/features/taxes/directtax.htm

The Pollock Court found that the income tax was a direct tax which could only be imposed if the tax was apportioned; ... Union Pacific Railroad Co., 240 U.S. 1, 36 S.Ct. 236 (1916). .... Income is property according to St. Louis Union Trust Co. v.

www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/98/569

98 U.S. 569 (, 25 L.Ed. 143). UNITED STATES v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY. Decided: NotFound. opinion, MILLER [HTML]; dissent, SWAYNE, ...

enacademic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/117620

Infobox SCOTUS case Litigants=Brushaber v. ... Union Pacific Railroad Company USVol=240 USPage=1… ... In the controversial 1895 case of " Pollock v.

freedom-school.com/16th-amendment-flyer.pdf

POLLOCK v FARMERS' LOAN & TRUST CO., 157 US 429 (1895). The Supreme Court ... BRUSHABER v UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. 240 U.S. 1 (1916).

nontaxpayer.net/brushaberpollock.html

As most everyone else, I early on became acquainted with the Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. Supreme Court decision. Many today still look to that ...