Legal Opinion

American Synthetic Dyes, Inc. v. Edwards

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided May 2, 1923Published

1Opinion of the Court

LEARNED HAND, District Judge.

The action is. in common form to recover from the collector the amount of a tax exacted by duress. The tax was levied upon the profits made by the plaintiff during the year 1916 from the manufacture and sale of wet picric acid. The acid so made was sold to the Imperial Russian Government and the republic of France for military purposes, and the question at issue is whether it was an “explosive” within the meaning of subdivision (1) (a) of section 301 of the revenue act of 1916 (Comp. St. § 6336%b). If it was, the defendant wins; if not, the plaintiff.

The technical…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. Aetna Explosives Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1921
  2. Monroe Cider Vinegar & Fruit Co. v. RiordanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922
  3. Worth Brothers Co. v. LedererSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
  4. Forged Steel Wheel Co. v. LewellynSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
  5. Dayton Brass Castings Co. v. GilliganCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1921

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API