Atkinson v. United States

Eighth Circuit

Atkinson v. United States

70 F.2d 515, 13 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1033, 1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 4207, 1934 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 9193, 13 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 1033

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedMarch 19, 1934

DocketNo. 9879

StatusPublished

This text of 70 F.2d 515 (Atkinson v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Atkinson v. United States, 70 F.2d 515, 13 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1033, 1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 4207, 1934 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 9193, 13 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 1033 (8th Cir. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by a taxpayer from an adverse judgment in an aetion to recover a balance of overpayment of income taxes. Appellee files a motion to dismiss upon various grounds. One of these is that the deposit with the clerk of this court has not been made, in full. It appears that this deficiency has been made good. The other grounds stated in the motion are that no question of law or fact has been properly preserved for review on this appeal. Although this court has sometimes considered similar grounds, they are strictly matters for presentation in connection with the appeal, and would, usually, result in affirmance of the action of the trial court instead of dismissal of the appeal. As the matters raised by the motion may vitally affect the merits of the appeal, we deny the motion to dismiss without intending to express any views upon the grounds urged in the motion.'

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by a taxpayer from an adverse judgment in an aetion to recover a balance of overpayment of income taxes. Appellee files a motion to dismiss upon various grounds. One of these is that the deposit with the clerk of this court has not been made, in full. It appears that this deficiency has been made good. The other grounds stated in the motion are that no question of law or fact has been properly preserved for review on this appeal. Although this court has sometimes considered similar grounds, they are strictly matters for presentation in connection with the appeal, and would, usually, result in affirmance of the action of the trial court instead of dismissal of the appeal. As the matters raised by the motion may vitally affect the merits of the appeal, we deny the motion to dismiss without intending to express any views upon the grounds urged in the motion.'

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

70 F.2d 515, 13 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1033, 1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 4207, 1934 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 9193, 13 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 1033, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/atkinson-v-united-states-ca8-1934.