Niagara Hudson Power Corporation v. Hoey
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
CLARK, Circuit Judge.
The question here presented is whether or not a corporation resulting from a consolidation of two existing corporations under § 86 of the New York Stock Corporation Law, Consol.Laws, c. 59, is liable for the federal documentary stamp tax levied by Section 800, Schedule A-3, of Title VIII of the Revenue Act of 1926, c. 27, 44 Stat. 9, 99, 101, as amended by Section 723(a) of the Revenue Act of 1932, c. 209, 47 Stat. 169, 272, 26 U.S.C. A. Int.Rev.Acts, page 290, in respect of stocks received by it from the constituent corporations.
Section 800, Schedule A-3, imposes the tax…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Burnet v. HarmelSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Lyeth v. HoeySupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- United States v. Merchants Nat. Trust & Savings BankCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1939
- Koppers Coal & Transportation Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1939
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Seattle-First Nat. Bank v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · 1942
- United States v. Niagara Hudson Power CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1944
- City Bank Farmers Trust Co. v. HoeyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1942
- Orpheum Bldg. Co. v. AnglimCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1942
- Emporium Capwell Co. v. AnglimCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1944
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.