Legal Opinion

United States v. Skilken

District Court, S.D. Ohio

Decided February 19, 1923No. 106PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SATER, District Judge.

Section 1 of the Act of March 3, 1897 (Comp. Stat. §§ 6070-6077), provides that, whenever any distilled spirits deposited in a warehouse of a distillery of a given daily capacity have been duly entered for bottling purposes for withdrawal upon payment of the tax or export in bond, and have been gauged and the required marks, brands, or tax-paid stamps or export stamps, as the case may be, have been affixed to the package or packages containing tlie same, the distiller or owner of such distilled spirits, on proper declaration duly made may remove such spirits to a…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. YuginovichSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  2. Higgins v. KeuffelSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
  3. Harkins v. WilliardCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1906
  4. Small Grain Distilling & Drug Co. v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1921
  5. Perkins v. HeertAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Spencer Gifts, Inc. v. Taxation Div. DirectorNew Jersey Tax Court · 1981
  2. Goldberger v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1925

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

Powered by the Exa API