Merrill v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
FRANK, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiffs argue that § 121(e) removes the bar of § 322(c). We cannot agree. § 121(e) specifically provides that, as to tax years before 1939, the amendment is to be treated as if it were a part of the original enactment, i. e., as if it had been in force in 1936. Accordingly, the plaintiffs could have made no further claim, with respect to the tax year of 1936 after the disposition of their petition filed in 1939. The fact that plaintiffs had no means of foreseeing the enactment of the 1942 amendment cannot affect the finality of the Board’s decision.
Nor is there any…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Moir v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1945
- Hartford-Empire Co. v. Com'r of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943
- White's Will v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1944
3Cited by8 opinions
- Elbert v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
- United States v. WolfCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1956
- EMPIRE TRUST COMPANY v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1963
- Elbert v. JohnsonDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1946
- Elbert v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.