Morgan v. United States
United States Court of Claims
1Opinion of the Court
LITTLETON, Judge.
Counsel for defendant contend that plaintiffs are not entitled to recover the unrefunded excess estate tax computed under section 322 of the Revenue Act of *10221926 (26 U.S.C.A. § 410 note) for the reason that this suit was not instituted within six years after February 26, 1926, the date of the enactment of section 325 of the Revenue Act of 1926 (44 Stat. 87).-This contention is without merit. Georges Edmond Phillippe Siegel and Andre Phillippe Oscar Siegel v. United States, 18 F.Supp. 771 and Detroit Trust Co., Administrator, v. United States, 18 F.Supp. 776, decided by…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Siegel v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1937
- Pearson v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1937
- Pearson v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1936
- Detroit Trust Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1937
3Cited by2 opinions
- Fahnestock v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1951
- Fahnestock v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1951