Legal Opinion

Roybark v. United States

District Court, S.D. California

Decided May 16, 1952PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HARRISON, District Judge.

Plaintiffs, husband and wife, have brought these actions for refund of taxes paid, 28 U.S.C.A., § 1340. The issues of law and fact being identical it was stipulated that whatever evidence applied to the husband’s case would apply as well to that of Mrs. Roybark.

The income tax returns of the plaintiffs for the years in question, 1945 and 1946, were filed with the Collector of Internal Revenue for the Sixth Collection District. During those years, Mr. Roybark was in the used automobile business. Subsequent to their filing, it was discovered that Mr. Roybark’s business…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Helvering v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  2. Lewis v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  3. Stone v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
  4. Sullenger v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1948
  5. Taylor v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1934

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Samuel C. Dysart and Alma R. Dysart v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1965
  2. United States v. PfisterCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1953
  3. Zeeman v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1967
  4. King Trailer Company v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1964
  5. United States v. Charles A. HarrisCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1955

19 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