Legal Opinion

Wilson Chemical Co. v. United States

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided May 15, 1963No. 28290PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FREEDMAN, District Judge.

This is a suit for refund of excise taxes. The Government claims that the jewelry involved was “sold at retail” and therefore was subject to the excise tax imposed by § 2400 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939 and § 4001 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

The facts have been stipulated by the parties and each side has moved for summary judgment.

Plaintiff manufactures a salve. It recruits children to sell the product by advertisements m children’s publications. Plaintiff retained no control over the manner in which the children sold the salve and disclaimed any…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Roland Electrical Co. v. WallingSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. Nathan Gellman, Burt Horwitz and Peter Podany, Co-Partners, D/B/A Gellman Brothers v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1956
  3. Louis, Ned E. And Basil A. Torti, Doing Business as Wisconsin De Luxe Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1957
  4. United Profit Sharing Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1930
  5. Worrell's Limited, Doing Business as R. D. Worrell Jewelry Co. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1962

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Appalachian Voices, et al. v. Tennessee Valley AuthorityDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 2025
  2. Appalachian Voices, et al. v. Tennessee Valley AuthorityDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API