APPEAL OF GULF PIPE LINE CO.

Annotate this Case

APPEAL OF GULF PIPE LINE CO.
1916 OK 496
157 P. 333
53 Okla. 562
Case Number: 7200
Decided: 05/02/1916
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

APPEAL OF GULF PIPE LINE CO.

Syllabus

¶0 REASSESSMENT FOR TAXATION. Reversed and remanded upon authority of Prairie Oil & Gas Co. v. Cruce et al., 45 Okla. 774, 147 P. 152.

Appeal from State Board of Equalization.

From the reassessment and increase of valuation of its property, for purposes of taxation, by the State Board of Equalization, the Gulf Pipe Line Company appeals. Reversed and remanded, with instructions.

James B. Diggs, Henry McGraw, and R. M. Greenslade, for appellant.
S. P. Freeling, Atty. Gen., and R. E. Wood, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

KANE, C. J.

¶1 This is an appeal by the Gulf Pipe Line Company from the action of the State Board of Equalization in reassessing and revaluing its property for purposes of taxation, and increasing the value thereof, taken by said board on the 13th day of August, 1914.

¶2 In this court it is stipulated by and between the Attorney General and counsel for the Gulf Pipe Line Company as follows:

"It is hereby agreed and stipulated that the increased assessment appealed from in the above-styled matter was made by the State Board of Equalization under identically the same facts as the assessment made against the Prairie Oil & Gas Company, as shown by the record in Prairie Oil & Gas Company v. Cruce et al., 45 Okla. 774, 147 P. 152, and that on the facts shown by the record in the above appeal the decision in the Prairie Oil & Gas Case controls this case; and for this reason it is further stipulated that the appeal be submitted to the court without putting the parties thereto to the expense of printing briefs."

¶3 In pursuance of said stipulation, and upon the authority of the above-entitled cause, the action of the State Board of Equalization must be reversed, and the cause remanded, with directions to proceed in accordance with the directions contained in said cause.

¶4 All the Justices concur.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.