Legal Opinion
Demko v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided June 18, 1999No. 98-661TPublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MILLER, Judge.
This case, before the court after argument on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment, presents the issues (1) whether the Striker-12 shotgun was properly classified as a destructive device and thus subject to a $200.00 transfer tax pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 5811 (1994), and (2) if so, whether the delegation of legislative authority to so classify is unconstitutionally vague.
FACTS
The following facts are undisputed, unless otherwise noted. The Striker-12 is a 12-gauge shotgun with a 12-round spring motor driven revolving magazine. 26 U.S.C. § 5845(f)(2) of 26 U.S.C.…
2Cases cited53 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Bailey v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Mistretta v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Yakus v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Federal Power Commission v. Hope Natural Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Trilles v. WestUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 2000
- John R. Ramsey Et Al. v. R. James NicholsonUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 2006
- Thomas A. Demko and Penn Arms, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2000
- Cottle v. PrincipiUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 2001
- Osage Tribe of Indians v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.