Legal Opinion
Hoffman v. United States
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided March 14, 1940PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PATTERSON, Circuit Judge.
The action is brought to recover overpayment of income tax in the amount of $8,-262.80, made by the bankrupt, Charles E. Ruckstuhl, for the year 1929. The action is under the Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 41 (20), 28 U.S.C.A. § 41(20). After a number of preliminary motions, it has been tried on the merits.
Ruckstuhl, the bankrupt, was in the typesetting business. Desiring' to engage in speculations in real estate without incurring personal liability for losses, he formed a corporation, C. E. Ruckstuhl, Inc., in 1924, to engage in real estate operations. The company was a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Higgins v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Pacific National Co. v. WelchSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Johnson v. CollierSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Van Der Stegen v. Neuss, Hesslein & Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1936
3Cited by6 opinions
- Fox-Greenwald Sheet Metal Co., Inc. v. Markowitz Bros., Inc., Continental Casualty Co., Blake Construction Co., Inc., United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1971
- De Franco v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1955
- Oliefabrik v. A. O. Smith Corp.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1958
- In re SussmanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1961
- Wallis v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1952
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.