Legal Opinion
Burnet v. First Nat. Bank of Fresno
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided January 26, 1931No. 6129PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Per curiam
The respondent has interposed a motion to dismiss the petition for review for the reason that the petition for appeal from the determination of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to the Board of Tax Appeals was not properly verified, and for the further reason that the. respondent was dissolved at the time the appeal was prosecuted. The motion is without merit.
In discussing a defective verification to a petition, in Leidigh Carriage Co. v. Stengel (C. C. A.) 95 F. 637, 641, Judge Taft said:
“The second objection embodied in the second and sixth assignments of error is that the petition and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- National Bank v. Insurance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Leidigh Carriage Co. v. StengelCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1899
- Burnet v. Bank of ItalyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1931
- Steward v. Atlantic Nat. Bank of BostonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1928
3Cited by7 opinions
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Liberty Bank & Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1932
- Continental Petroleum Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1936
- Studna v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1964
- Eaton v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1967
- Schwartz v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1944
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.