Legal Opinion
Lipsett v. United States
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided May 7, 1965PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CANNELLA, District Judge.
Motion by eleven (11) petitioners, pursuant to Rule 24(b) (2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for an order permitting them to intervene in the above entitled action, is denied.
The action by the named plaintiffs seeks a refund of federal income taxes paid as a result of deficiencies asserted by the Internal Revenue Service. The action is brought in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a) (1). Both the named plaintiffs and the petitioners were holders of stock options in Ogden Corporation, in which they were all employees. On May 2, 1956 Ogden Corporation purchased…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- United States v. SherwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Bull v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Lewis v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Rothensies v. Electric Storage Battery Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Tucker v. AlexanderSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Demarco v. EdensCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1968
- Millsaps v. United States (In Re Millsaps)United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · 1991
- Fisher v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
- Saunooke v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1985
- Hurley v. Van LareDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1973
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.