Jose Escalante & Co. v. Fontenot
79 F.2d 343, 16 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 646, 1935 U.S. App. LEXIS 4108, 16 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 646
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 13, 1935
DocketNo. 7883
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases
This text of 79 F.2d 343 (Jose Escalante & Co. v. Fontenot) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Jose Escalante & Co. v. Fontenot, 79 F.2d 343, 16 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 646, 1935 U.S. App. LEXIS 4108, 16 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 646 (5th Cir. 1935).
Opinion
It appearing that the appellant has a plain and adequate remedy at law under the Agricultural Adjustment Act.as amended, 7 USCA § 601 et seq., it is ordered that the petition of the appellant for an order to stay the collection of the taxes pending the appeal to this court be, and the same is hereby, denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
John A. Gebelein, Inc. v. Milbourne
12 F. Supp. 105 (D. Maryland, 1935)
Kingan & Co. v. Smith
12 F. Supp. 329 (S.D. Indiana, 1935)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
79 F.2d 343, 16 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 646, 1935 U.S. App. LEXIS 4108, 16 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 646, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jose-escalante-co-v-fontenot-ca5-1935.