Thompson v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY. This was au action on a bond in the penal sum of $41,000, given by-the defendant Thompson.-and his sureties for the exportation of certain distilled spirits.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY. This was au action on a bond in the penal sum of $41,000, given by-the defendant Thompson.-and his sureties for the exportation of certain distilled spirits. The bond was dated October 23, 1885, and after reciting a prior bond given on the 8th of April, *1885, by the same parties, conditioned for the delivery of certain distilled spirits therein named on board ship at the port of Newport News, Virginia,, for exportation to Melbourne, Australia, and for the performance of certain other things therein named, and after…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Brown
The sole question presented for our consideration in this case is whether defendants are liable for the tax upon 1056 gallons of spirits lost by evaporation between the giving of the first bond in April, 1885, and the second bond on October 23d of the same year. This depends upon the construction of the excise laws of Congress regulating the taxing and eimportation of distilled spirits manufactured in this country. By Revised Statutes, section 3248, distilled spirits are defined to be “ that substance known as ethyl alcohol, hydrated' oxide of ethyl, or spirit of wine, which is commonly…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Pocahontas Tanning Co. v. St. Lawrence Boom & Mfg. Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1908
- Brown-Forman Corp. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1990
- Erie Railroad v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1957
- United States v. RizzoSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Schenley Distillers, Inc., and Joseph S. Finch and Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1958
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.