Popham v. Jamison

80 F. Supp. 221, 37 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 421, 1948 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2062
CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri
DecidedJuly 9, 1948
DocketNo. 5106
StatusPublished

This text of 80 F. Supp. 221 (Popham v. Jamison) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Popham v. Jamison, 80 F. Supp. 221, 37 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 421, 1948 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2062 (W.D. Mo. 1948).

Opinion

DUNCAN, District-Judge.

Plaintiff instituted this action against 'the defendant to recover a stated amount alleged to have been improperly assessed and collected by the Collector of Internal Revenue for income taxes for the years 1942 and 1943. The assessment and the collection of the amounts were made by the predecessor of the defendant. The defendant has filed a motion to dismiss and it must be sustained. “An action against a collector of internal revenue to recover taxes erroneously exacted by him, is based upon his personal liability and cannot be maintained against his successor in office who had no part in the assessment, collection or disbursement of the taxes.” Smietanka, Collector of Internal Revenue for the First District of Illinois, v. Indiana Steel Company, 257 U.S. 1, 42 S.Ct. 1, 66 L.Ed. 99.

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

Related

Smietanka v. Indiana Steel Co.
257 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court, 1921)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
80 F. Supp. 221, 37 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 421, 1948 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2062, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/popham-v-jamison-mowd-1948.