Legal Opinion

Monday v. United States

District Court, E.D. Wisconsin

Decided January 14, 1969No. 66-C-140PublishedCited by 3 opinions

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

  1. Edward J. Bloom v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960
  2. Hal C. Frazier v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
  3. The Gray Line Company, a Corporation v. R. C. Granquist, District Director of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1956
  4. Anthony Flan v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1964
  5. Cross v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 1962

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Robert W. Monday v. United States of America, and Third-Party v. John A. Monday, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1970
  2. Monday v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1972
  3. DeHayes v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1970

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

Powered by the Exa API