Heisler v. United States

Ninth Circuit

Heisler v. United States

463 F.2d 375, 30 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 72

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJune 21, 1972

DocketNo. 26121

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 463 F.2d 375 (Heisler v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Heisler v. United States, 463 F.2d 375, 30 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 72 (9th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

In this tax case the district court had jurisdiction over the refund claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a) (1). The appellants, however, do not fit within the statute. Their bodies and skills are not among the “other natural deposits” for which the Internal Revenue Code allows a deduction for percentage depletion.

On the claim that 26 U.S.C. sections 611 et seq. are unconstitutional, the Heislers lack the requisite standing to raise this issue. Flast v. Cohen, 392 U.S. 83, 88 S.Ct. 1942, 20 L.Ed.2d 947 (1968).

The appellants style their lawsuit a class action. However, there is no showing that any other members of the purported class filed the requisite demands for refund. 26 U.S.C. § 7422.

The judgment is affirmed.

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