Legal Opinion

Jenkins S. S. Co. v. Routzahn

District Court, N.D. Ohio

Decided August 13, 1930No. 15818PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

WEST, District Judge.

Plaintiff’s demurrer to the answer as a whole must be overruled if any sufficient defense appears. In my opinion, paragraph 7 states a complete defense under Rev. St. § 3226 (26 USCA § 156). Counsel’s claim that the action is not to recover a penalty, but is for money ordered refunded on account of plaintiff’s overpayment of taxes for another year, is not borne out by the averments of the petition. When the government withheld the money and applied it in satisfaction of the penalty, it effected collection of the penalty exactly as if it had received plaintiff’s check.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Brady v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928
  2. Peerless Paper Box Mfg. Co. v. RoutzahnDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1927
  3. National Tool Co. v. RoutzahnDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1928

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Wm. J. Friday & Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1931

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

Powered by the Exa API