Rickert Rice Milling Co. v. Fontenot

79 F.2d 700, 16 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 853, 1935 U.S. App. LEXIS 4240, 16 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 853
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedNovember 5, 1935
DocketNo. 7937
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 79 F.2d 700 (Rickert Rice Milling 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
Rickert Rice Milling Co. v. Fontenot, 79 F.2d 700, 16 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 853, 1935 U.S. App. LEXIS 4240, 16 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 853 (5th Cir. 1935).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of the application for an injunction to stay collection of taxes levied under the provisions of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, as amended by the Act of August 24, 1935 (7 USCA § 601 et seq.), the court is of the opinion that the taxpayer has a remedy at law to recover back any taxes illegally exacted, and, further, that the provisions of the act as amended deprive the court of jurisdiction to grant injunctive relief.

It is ordered that the application be denied.

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

Related

Kingan & Co. v. Smith
16 F. Supp. 549 (S.D. Indiana, 1936)
In re Processing Tax Case
13 F. Supp. 218 (W.D. Texas, 1935)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
79 F.2d 700, 16 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 853, 1935 U.S. App. LEXIS 4240, 16 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 853, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rickert-rice-milling-co-v-fontenot-ca5-1935.