Legal Opinion
Hatch v. Morosco Holding Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided May 18, 1931No. 264PublishedCited by 45 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*139SWAN, Circuit Judge,
(after stating the facts as above).
The order appealed from allows the United States to prove as a claim against the receivership taxes assessed against Moroseo Holding Company under section 280 of the Revenue Act of 1926 (44 Stat. 61 [26 USCA § 1069]), the validity of which this court sustained in Phillips v. Commissioner, 42 F.(2d) 177, pending on certiorari in the Supreme Court, 51 S. Ct. 82, 75 L. Ed. -. That section imposes no new obligation upon the transferee of property of a taxpayer, but it permits collection from him, by a summary procedure, of taxes owed by the…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Hollins v. Brierfield Coal & Iron Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Scott v. NeelySupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Angle v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
- United States v. UpdikeSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Re Metropolitan Railway ReceivershipSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Commissioner v. SternSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Scott v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1941
- Ruth Halle Rowen, Ethel F. Halle, and Edward Halle v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1954
- American Equitable Assur. Co. of New York v. HelveringCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
- United States v. 58th Street Plaza Theatre, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1968
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.