Ring Constr. Corp. v. Secretary of War
United States Tax Court
1. Unconstitutionality of the Renegotiation Act of April 28, 1942, held not shown. 2. The amount of excessive profits from a contract for erection of a part of a soldiers' cantonment determined under Renegotiation Act and upon the evidence.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Disney, Judge:
We should first consider the question of constitutionality of the Renegotiation Act, as propounded by the petitioner. It is, of course, to be presumed constitutional, and the burden is on the petitioner to demonstrate otherwise. Summarized, the reasons advanced for unconstitutionality are (a) that the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, providing against taking of property without due process of law, protects the petitioner against impairments of its rights under a contract executed prior to passage of the Renegotiation Act, and that “recovery of…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Yakus v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Mugler v. KansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Lynch v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Bowles v. WillinghamSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. MottleySupreme Court of the United States · 1911
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Lichter v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1953
- Southern California Acoustics Co. v. C. V. Holder, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1969
- Grob Bros. v. Secretary of WarUnited States Tax Court · 1947
- Nat'l Elec. Welding Machs. Co. v. StimsonUnited States Tax Court · 1948
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.