Monday v. United States
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT, OR FOR A NEW TRIAL
REYNOLDS, District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
This opinion on the Government’s motions after verdict is primarily concerned with the proper construction of the word “willfully” as used in § 6672 of the Internal Revenue Cede.1 The Government, in effect, claims that the word “willfully” does not include the concept of reasonable cause and in effect means “knowingly.”
This court believes that the word in the statute has a meaning which in part encompasses the concept that where the failure to do the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Edward J. Bloom v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960
- Hal C. Frazier v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
- The Gray Line Company, a Corporation v. R. C. Granquist, District Director of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1956
- Anthony Flan v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1964
- Cross v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 1962
3Cited by3 opinions
- Robert W. Monday v. United States of America, and Third-Party v. John A. Monday, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1970
- Monday v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1972
- DeHayes v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1970