Legal Opinion

Vidal v. Stahmann Farms

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided December 27, 1937No. 1568PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SYMES, District Judge.

Plaintiff below (Stahmann Farms), a copartnership, recovered judgment for $13,064.52 against the appellant (defendant below), in the District Court of the United States for the-District of New Mexico, al- ■ leged to have been paid as taxes under the so-called Bankhead Cotton Act, Act of April 21, 1934, c. 157, 48 Stat. 598, 7 U.S.C.A. §§ 701-725 notes: The defendant appeals. Two questions are briefed and argued: (1) Is the plaintiff the proper party to maintain this action; (2) is the so-called Bank-head Cotton Act, supra, constitutional.

A jury trial was waived and the…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Liverpool, New York & Philadelphia Steamship Co. v. Commissioners of EmigrationSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
  2. Arizona v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  3. Ward v. Board of Commr's of Love Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1920
  4. United Fuel Gas Co. v. Railroad CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
  5. Little v. BowersSupreme Court of the United States · 1890

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Stahmann v. VidalSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Rocha v. RochaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956

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

Powered by the Exa API