Pine Hill Crystal Spring Water Co. v. United States

Court of Claims

Pine Hill Crystal Spring Water Co. v. United States

58 F.2d 506

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedMay 2, 1932

DocketNo. J-613

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 58 F.2d 506 (Pine Hill Crystal Spring Water Co. 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

Pine Hill Crystal Spring Water Co. v. United States, 58 F.2d 506 (cc 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This case turns upon the question as to whether the plaintiff filed in time a proper claim for refund. Plaintiff contends that the letter of January 31, 1923 (finding 4), is a sufficient and legal refund claim. This issue was involved in the case of Philipsborn v. United States, 53 F. (2d) 133, 72 Ct. Cl. 545, and we think that the plaintiff’s case comes within that decision. See, also, Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. v. United States, 260 U. S. 565, 43 S. Ct. 169, 67 L. Ed. 406.

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

PER CURIAM.

This case turns upon the question as to whether the plaintiff filed in time a proper claim for refund. Plaintiff contends that the letter of January 31, 1923 (finding 4), is a sufficient and legal refund claim. This issue was involved in the case of Philipsborn v. United States, 53 F. (2d) 133, 72 Ct. Cl. 545, and we think that the plaintiff’s case comes within that decision. See, also, Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. v. United States, 260 U. S. 565, 43 S. Ct. 169, 67 L. Ed. 406.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 F.2d 506, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pine-hill-crystal-spring-water-co-v-united-states-cc-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack