Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
Find the right lawyer for your legal problem

Faster, Smarter and More Accurate

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (in case citations, 1st Cir.) is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:

More
Find Case Laws by Filters
Sort byYou can sort data by applying different sort criteria
Most Lastest
Most Earliest
The Last Three Years
White v. Lewis, 2708 (1932)

v., Walter C. LEWIS, Plaintiff, Appellee.

# 1
Scalia v. United States, 2695 (1932)

62 F.2d 220 (1932), SCALIA, v., UNITED STATES., BINGHAM, Circuit Judge., The first two sentences of the above paragraph relate to the power of the probation officer to arrest the probationer within the probation period (in this case two years), and to his being presently taken before the court.

# 2
United States v. Palmer & Parker Co., 2681 (1932)

61 F.2d 455 (1932), UNITED STATES, v., PALMER PARKER CO. et al. 504, 64 L. Ed. 801;, In this case, where there was no real market for mahogany logs, the attempt to apply the market value rule involved more of doubt and confusion than an attempt to assess the real damages suffered by appellee;

# 3
THIRD NATIONAL BANK & TRUST COMPANY v. White, 2674 (1932)

58 F.2d 1085 (1932), THIRD NATIONAL BANK TRUST COMPANY OF SPRINGFIELD et al.v., Thomas W. WHITE, Collector., Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit., Harold P. Small, of Springfield, Mass., for appellants., *1086 J. Duke Smith, Sp. Asst., Before BINGHAM, ANDERSON, and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

# 4
Old Colony Trust Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Rev., 2670 (1932)

, J. Louis Monarch, Sp. Asst., At the hearing before the Board, the Commissioner moved to increase the deficiency tax of Mr. Shugrue for 1923 by including in his income for the year the par value of the preferred stock issued to him in payment of the sum voted to him as salary for previous years.

# 5
Smith v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 2669 (1932)

, B. To appoint a successor to any trustee who dies, resigns, or is removed. then neither Reginald, Cecil, nor the father, Emelius, would be a beneficiary under the other trusts created for Harold C. Smith or Kendall K. Smith, for their interests under each of those trusts are contingent.

# 6
In Re Goldman, 2662 (1932)

, Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit. To affirm the order of the bankruptcy court in this case would establish the right of a referee to order a bankrupt to pay over to the trustee money without a finding that it is assets which the bankrupt has concealed, or the proceeds of concealed assets.

# 7
Berkman v. Tillinghast, 2660 (1932)

The testimony of Lieutenant Hynes appears to have been fairly taken. The request was refused by the immigration tribunals, with the statement that the Immigration Service was in no manner a party to the seizure, and that the matter seized would be used in evidence against Murdoch and Berkman.

# 8
Central Vermont Ry. Co. v. Marsch, 2653 (1932)

, The note of $4, 000 was given to the bank to raise funds to pay the taxes of 1926 and, the tax sales having been set aside, the real question on this appeal is whether the receivers are liable for the unpaid taxes that accrued during the receivership on the real estate of which they took charge.

# 9
Albert Pick-Barth Co. v. Mitchell Woodbury Corp., 2648 (1932)

A. No., Q. 5. It was some time before the plaintiff could perfect another organization in its kitchen equipment department, and as a result of the action of Stuart and McDonald in conjunction with the defendant corporation, it suffered considerable loss of business, both interstate and intrastate.

# 10
American Woolen Co. v. White, 2646 (1932)

, J. Duke Smith, Sp. Asst., In the case last cited the court said: The plaintiff in this case elected, upon the receipt of the deficiency assessment notice, to take its controversy with the Commissioner of Internal Revenue as to its tax liability for the year 1926 to the Board of Tax Appeals.

# 11
Brampton Woolen Co. v. Field, 2639 (1932)

Ohio Steel Foundry Co. v. United States (Ct. And having *27 been collected, sections 284 (d) and 1003 of the Revenue Act of 1926 exclude original jurisdiction by the courts in any action to recover a refund until the amount of the tax due for the year in question is finally determined.

# 12
Malaga v. United States, 2637 (1932)

, WILSON, Circuit Judge. Wilson v. United States, 162 U.S. 613, 16 S. Ct. 327, 333, 40 L. Ed. 474, in which case the trial judge denounced the testimony of the accused as perjury, Judge, later Chief Justice, White said: Such denunciation of the testimony of an accused is without legal warrant.

# 13
Hammon v. Paine, 2629 (1932)

The pertinent facts found are as follows:, The plaintiff, desiring to engage in certain stock transactions, but not in her own name, turned over 5, 000 shares of Ventura Company stock to one John Cunniff on the understanding that he was to use it as margins on a trading account for her.

# 14
Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. SA Woods MacH. Co., 2616 (1932)

After acquiring the stock, the Woods Company by proper corporate action retired it, thereby reducing its capital stock from 3, 000 shares to 1, 978 shares. Spear Co. v. Heiner (D. C.) 54 F.(2d) 134. (Holmes, J.) See, too, Maryland Casualty Co. v. United States, 251 U.S. 342, 40 S. Ct.

# 15
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer D. Corp. v. Bijou Theatre Co., 2614, 2615 (1932)

501, 54 L. Ed. 762;, The case was taken on appeal to the United States Supreme Court, Kalem Co. v. Harper Bros., We are not called upon to decide whether the unlicensed exhibition of a motion picture other than a photoplay would constitute an infringement of the copyrighted film of such a picture.

# 16
New England Trust Co. v. Farr, 2611 (1932)

He testified that almost immediately upon Palfrey's association with the plaintiffs he (Morrill) placed through Palfrey's agency an order with Farr Co. for the purchase of 100 shares of U. G. I. stock (United Gas Improvement), when, as, and if issued. It relates largely to the knowledge;

# 17
Gilbert v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 2608 (1932)

These exceptions specify three kinds of property which do not become capital assets by being owned by the taxpayer for more than two years, viz., stock in trade, property properly included in the inventory of the business, and property held primarily for sale in the course of the business.

# 18
Hart v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 2600 (1932)

Hart could not properly include the income from the bonds in his inventory for the taxable year 1926 because he did not know that the bonds and interest would be returned to him.

# 19
Lavien v. Norman, 2589-2591 (1932)

Riley, Fitzgerald Co. failed to meet the demand, and Clark, Childs Co. sold sufficient of the securities deposited with them by Riley, Fitzgerald Co., including all the shares of stock purchased for Lavien, except the twenty shares of Atlas Tack, to liquidate Riley, Fitzgerald Co.'s account.

# 20

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer