Legal Opinion

Morgan v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided April 26, 1937No. 42535PublishedCited by 2 opinions

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

  1. Siegel v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1937
  2. Pearson v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1937
  3. Pearson v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1936
  4. Detroit Trust Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1937

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Fahnestock v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1951
  2. Fahnestock v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1951

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

Powered by the Exa API