Legal Opinion

Michel v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided January 6, 1930No. Nos. 141, 142PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAugustus N. Hand, Circuit Judge

(after stating the facts as above). The question before us is the effect to be given to the provision of the statute that the Commissioner of Internal Revenue shall within ninety days after the disallowance of a claim to refund taxes notify the taxpayer thereof by mail.

If the words directing notice amount to no more than a regulation for the promotion of efficient administration and are not a requirement for the protection of the taxpayer, then the claim of each plaintiff is barred because more than two years have elapsed since his claim was rejected. But it is hard to suppose that the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. French v. EdwardsSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
  2. Girard Trust Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
  3. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. Westinghouse, Church, Kerr & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  4. Mahoning Coal R. v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1928

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Mobile Drug Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. Alabama · 1930
  2. Connell v. HopkinsDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 1930
  3. United States ex rel. Clifton Mfg. Co. v. BurnetCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1932
  4. Solomon v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API