Legal Opinion

Saller v. United States

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided May 20, 1940No. 619PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

KALODNER, District Judge.

This case arises upon a motion to dismiss the complaint and, therefore, the facts alleged therein must be accepted as true for the purposes of the present decision. Prior to the effective date of the processing tax on rye, imposed under the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, 7 U.S.C.A. § 601 et seq., plaintiff had contracted to purchase the output of rye whiskey of the Harford Pure Rye Distillers, Inc., at a fixed price base, which agreement did not by its terms permit the addition to the price of any taxes. Subsequent to the imposition of the aforementioned tax,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. United States v. ButlerSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
  2. Anniston Manufacturing Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
  3. Rickert Rice Mills, Inc. v. FontenotSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
  4. F. & F. LABORATORIES v. Commissioner of Internal Rev.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1939
  5. Seligman's, Inc. v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Louisiana · 1939

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Saller v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API