Legal Opinion

Athletic Shoe Co. v. United States

District Court, N.D. Illinois

Decided October 21, 1937No. 44905PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

WOODWARD, District Judge.

The single issue presented by this record is whether or not the excise tax imposed by section 609 of the Revenue Act of 1932 is applicable to football shoes, track shoes, and bowling shoes.

Section 609 of the Revenue Act of 1932 (47 Stat. 264, c. 209, § 609 [26 U.S.C.A. § 1420 et seq. note]) provides as follows: “There is hereby imposed upon the following articles, sold by the manufacturer, producer, or importer, a tax equivalent to 10 per centum of the price for which so sold: Tennis rackets, tennis racket frames and strings, nets, racket covers and presses, skates,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Helvering v. City Bank Farmers Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1935
  2. Lewellyn v. HarbisonCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1929
  3. Mills Novelty Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1931
  4. Samuel Winslow Skate Mfg. Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1931

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co. v. HarrisonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1940

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

Powered by the Exa API