Legal Opinion
Holmes Limestone Co. v. United States
District Court, N.D. Ohio
Decided November 13, 1996No. 5:93 CV 1622; 5:93 CV 1623; 5:93 CV 1624 and 5:93 CV 1625PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION
SAM H. BELL, District Judge.
The instant matter consists of several consolidated causes brought for refund of overpaid coal excise taxes paid by the various Plaintiffs (Holmes Limestone Company, Rodeo, Inc., G & M Mineral Company, and L & M Mineral Company) pursuant to 26 U.S.C. Section 4121, and one cause brought to challenge the appropriateness of a fraud penalty assessed against Plaintiff Rodeo pursuant to 26 U.S.C. Section 6653(b). All Plaintiffs are corporations which do business in the same industry and in the same general area of Ohio; all are primarily owned and…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Grogan v. GarnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Spies v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Perrin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Reiter v. Sonotone Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1979
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Emerald International Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2002
- Amax Coal Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · 1996
- FE Schumacher Co., Inc. v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2004
- Browning Arms Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2003