Legal Opinion

Solomon Rosenberg v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided January 29, 1964No. 28492_1PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KAUFMAN, Circuit Judge.

This is an action against the United States for the recovery of $200, paid in partial satisfaction of a 100% civil penalty imposed for the fraudulent evasion of federal excise taxes. On cross-motions for summary judgment, the District Court determined that the penalty was valid and dismissed the plaintiff’s complaint. Challenging the statutory foun dation for the imposition of the penalty, plaintiff has brought this appeal. 1

The relevant facts are not in dispute. For the period in question, Rosenberg was a principal officer of Ross-Reines Manhattan Furs, Inc., a retail…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Edward J. Bloom v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960
  2. Christie v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1959

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Robert W. Monday v. United States of America, and Third-Party v. John A. Monday, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1970
  2. Joseph Datlof v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1966
  3. Charles E. Bradley and David P. Agnew v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1991
  4. Spivak v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1966
  5. United States v. Huckabee Auto Co.District Court, M.D. Georgia · 1985

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API