Commonwealth of Pennsylvania ex rel. Margiotti v. Kyle

Third Circuit

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania ex rel. Margiotti v. Kyle

79 F.2d 520, 16 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 820, 1935 U.S. App. LEXIS 4177

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedSeptember 16, 1935

DocketNo. 5743

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 79 F.2d 520 (Commonwealth of Pennsylvania ex rel. Margiotti v. Kyle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania ex rel. Margiotti v. Kyle, 79 F.2d 520, 16 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 820, 1935 U.S. App. LEXIS 4177 (3d Cir. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.

In this case the commonwealth- of Pennsylvania filed a bill in a state court against the collector of internal revenue, seeking to enjoin the latter from enforcing collection of United States taxes assessed against that state for carrying on the sale of liquors through its state liquor stores and an excise tax upon the liquor the state had in store. On filing the bill, the state court granted the injunction prayed for. On application of the collector, the case was removed to the court below, and, on motion of the state to remand on the ground the court below had no jurisdiction, the District Court refused so to do, on the ground that it had jurisdiction of the federal question involved and on the merits dismissed the bill on two principles — one, that the state had adequate remedy at law, viz., paying the contested taxes and bringing suit for the recovery of the same because allegedly illegally assessed; and for the further reason that under the cases of State of Ohio v. Helvering, 292 U. S. 360, 54 S. Ct. 725, 78 L. Ed. 1307, and State of South Carolina v. U. S., 199 U. S. 437, 26 S. Ct. 110, 50 L. Ed. 261, 4 Ann. Cas. 737, the taxes were legally payable. Thereupon the commonwealth took this appeal, assigning as error the refusal to remand and the dismissal of the bill.

Finding no error in the court’s action, the judgment is affirmed.

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

BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.

In this case the commonwealth- of Pennsylvania filed a bill in a state court against the collector of internal revenue, seeking to enjoin the latter from enforcing collection of United States taxes assessed against that state for carrying on the sale of liquors through its state liquor stores and an excise tax upon the liquor the state had in store. On filing the bill, the state court granted the injunction prayed for. On application of the collector, the case was removed to the court below, and, on motion of the state to remand on the ground the court below had no jurisdiction, the District Court refused so to do, on the ground that it had jurisdiction of the federal question involved and on the merits dismissed the bill on two principles — one, that the state had adequate remedy at law, viz., paying the contested taxes and bringing suit for the recovery of the same because allegedly illegally assessed; and for the further reason that under the cases of State of Ohio v. Helvering, 292 U. S. 360, 54 S. Ct. 725, 78 L. Ed. 1307, and State of South Carolina v. U. S., 199 U. S. 437, 26 S. Ct. 110, 50 L. Ed. 261, 4 Ann. Cas. 737, the taxes were legally payable. Thereupon the commonwealth took this appeal, assigning as error the refusal to remand and the dismissal of the bill.

Finding no error in the court’s action, the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

79 F.2d 520, 16 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 820, 1935 U.S. App. LEXIS 4177, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-of-pennsylvania-ex-rel-margiotti-v-kyle-ca3-1935.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack