Legal Opinion
Baltic Mills Co. v. Bitgood
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided August 28, 1935No. Nos. 2475, 2476PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HINCKS, District Judge.
These bills each allege that the plaintiff is a processor within the definitions of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, hereinafter referred to as the AAA, 7 USCA § 601 et seq., and the Regulations issued by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue and approved by the Secretary of the Treasury; that notwithstanding the unconstitutionality of the AAA, the defendant will assess and collect by summary proceedings, or otherwise, processing taxes imposed upon the plaintiffs under the provisions of the AAA; that unless plaintiffs pay said taxes when due (in Equity 2475 the next tax…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Miller v. Standard Nut Margarine Co. of Fla.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Hill v. WallaceSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Dows v. City of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- United States v. Jefferson Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Dodge v. OsbornSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- John A. Gebelein, Inc. v. MilbourneDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1935
- Edwin Cigar Co. v. HigginsDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1936
- Kingan & Co. v. SmithDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · 1935
- Grosvenor-Dale Co. v. BitgoodDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1935