Joyce v. United States

Court of Claims

Joyce v. United States

48 F. Supp. 520, 98 Ct. Cl. 427, 32 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1681, 1943 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 117

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedFebruary 1, 1943

DocketNo. 45734

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 48 F. Supp. 520 (Joyce v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Joyce v. United States, 48 F. Supp. 520, 98 Ct. Cl. 427, 32 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1681, 1943 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 117 (cc 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

The facts sufficiently appear from the opinion per curiam, as follows:

The plaintiff sues to recover income taxes alleged to have been erroneously collected for the year 1934. The defendant on September 16, 1942, filed a plea alleging [428]*428that at 'the timé this suit was filed and ever, since there has heen pending' against Frank F. Gentsch, Collector of Internal -Revenue at Cleveland, Ohio, a suit on the same cause of' action and that when the cause- of action arose the said Gentsch was acting under the authority of the United States. ItJ'thdreforej asks that this suit be dismissed.

Copy of this plea was mailed plaintiff’s attorneys on September 16,1942, which raises a presumption of service. (Rule 83 (c) ), and no reply thereto has been made. Thé case was placed on the law calendar for hearing on the plea under rule 86, but the plaintiff did not appear when the cas'eWás hailed. . The allegations of the. plea, therefore, must be taken as confessed.

Section 154 of the Judicial Code prohibits the prosecution of a suit in this court while there- is pending in any other court a suit against a person who at the time the cause of action arose was acting or professing to act in respect thereto under the authority of the United States. The defendant’s plea is sustained and this suit, therefore, must be dismissed. It is so ordered.

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

The facts sufficiently appear from the opinion per curiam, as follows:

The plaintiff sues to recover income taxes alleged to have been erroneously collected for the year 1934. The defendant on September 16, 1942, filed a plea alleging [428]*428that at 'the timé this suit was filed and ever, since there has heen pending' against Frank F. Gentsch, Collector of Internal -Revenue at Cleveland, Ohio, a suit on the same cause of' action and that when the cause- of action arose the said Gentsch was acting under the authority of the United States. ItJ'thdreforej asks that this suit be dismissed.

Copy of this plea was mailed plaintiff’s attorneys on September 16,1942, which raises a presumption of service. (Rule 83 (c) ), and no reply thereto has been made. Thé case was placed on the law calendar for hearing on the plea under rule 86, but the plaintiff did not appear when the cas'eWás hailed. . The allegations of the. plea, therefore, must be taken as confessed.

Section 154 of the Judicial Code prohibits the prosecution of a suit in this court while there- is pending in any other court a suit against a person who at the time the cause of action arose was acting or professing to act in respect thereto under the authority of the United States. The defendant’s plea is sustained and this suit, therefore, must be dismissed. It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 F. Supp. 520, 98 Ct. Cl. 427, 32 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1681, 1943 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joyce-v-united-states-cc-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack