Legal Opinion

Stanolind Oil & Gas Co. v. Jones

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma

Decided June 27, 1940No. Nos. 251-253PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAUGHT, District Judge.

The plaintiffs sue for the return of capital stock taxes paid in 1933, under the provisions of Section 215 of the National Industrial Recovery Act, approved June 16, 1933, 48 Stat. 207, to the defendant Collector of Internal Revenue, on the ground that the statutes purporting to levy the capital stock tax and the excess profits tax are unconstitutional.

The sections of the law questioned provide in part as follows:

“Sec. 215. (a) For each year ending June 30 there is hereby imposed upon every domestic corporation with respect to carrying on or doing business for any part…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Sorrells v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  2. Armstrong Paint & Varnish Works v. Nu-Enamel Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. Burnet v. GuggenheimSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  4. Haggar Co. v. Helvering, Com'r of Internal RevenueSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  5. Hawaii v. MankichiSupreme Court of the United States · 1903

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Rochester Gas & Electric Corp. v. McGowanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1940
  2. Prime Securities Corp. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1941
  3. American Viscose Corp. v. RothensiesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941
  4. Liberty Paper Board Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1941
  5. Utah Oil Refining Co. v. HinckleyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API