Legal Opinion

Crocker v. Carney

District Court, D. Massachusetts

Decided November 17, 1936No. 6627PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SWEENEY, District Judge.

This is an action at law to recover an excise tax alleged to have been illegally assessed and collected by the defendant, under section 213(a) of the National Industrial Recovery Act (48 Stat. 206). The tax was paid under protest, and the plaintiffs’ claim for refund, duly filed with the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, was denied.

Findings of Fact.

The plaintiffs are trustees of Crock-er, Burbank & Co. Ass’n, an association created under an indenture of trust. On March 24, 1933, the plaintiffs, acting as trustees of Crocker, Burbank & Co. Ass’n, adopted the following…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. United States v. Southwestern Portland Cement Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1938
  2. United States v. Southwestern R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1937
  3. Alexander & Alexander, Inc. v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1938
  4. United States v. Southwestern Portland Cement Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API