Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Rosenstadt & Waller, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided June 4, 1934No. 41843Published

1Concurrence

LITTLETON, Judge.

I cannot concur in the reasoning in the first part of the opinion of the court in this ease, but I agree that plaintiff is not entitled to recover, and that the petition must be dismissed under the decision in American Hide & Leather Co. v. United States, 284 U. S. 343, 52 S. Ct. 154, 76 L. Ed. 331. Under the rule announced in that case, all of the taxes due for the fiscal period January 1 to March 31, 1918, and for the fiscal years ending March 31, 1919 and 1920, were legally paid prior to the expiration of any statute of limitation, and the action of the Commissioner on…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. American Hide & Leather Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  2. Mann v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1932

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

Powered by the Exa API