Legal Opinion
United States v. One 1956 Ford Tudor Sedan (Victoria) Motor No. M6nv-112513 (Steve Kaluk, Jr., Claimant)
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Decided April 2, 1958No. 7564_1PublishedCited by 36 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HAYNSWORTH, Circuit Judge.
This is a proceeding under §§ 7301 and 7302 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 26 U.S.C.A. §§ 7301, 7302 for the forfeiture of an automobile. The District Court reached the legal conclusion that the vehicle was not forfeitable, because, in its view, the substantially un-contradicted facts did not show that it had been used, or was intended for use, in violation of the internal revenue laws. The United States has brought the case here.
The owner of the Ford automobile, one DeHart, using a fictitious name, purchased for cash a large quantity of sugar in Bluefield,…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- United States v. One Ford Coupe AutomobileSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Dodge v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- United States v. Lane Motor Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Strong v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1931
- United States v. Eight Boxes Containing Various Articles of Miscellaneous MerchandiseCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- One 1958 Plymouth Sedan v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Terry L. Madewell v. Mike Downs, Anthony P. Grootens, and John PrineCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1995
- Nannie v. Compton v. United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1964
- Farley v. $168,400.97Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1969
- Fuqua v. ArmourTennessee Supreme Court · 1976
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.