Roy & Titcomb, Inc. v. United States

Supreme Court

Roy & Titcomb, Inc. v. United States

282 U.S. 811, 75 L. Ed. 727, 51 S. Ct. 197, 1931 U.S. LEXIS 930, 9 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 969

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJanuary 26, 1931

DocketNo. 412

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 282 U.S. 811 (Roy & Titcomb, Inc. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Roy & Titcomb, Inc. v. United States, 282 U.S. 811, 75 L. Ed. 727, 51 S. Ct. 197, 1931 U.S. LEXIS 930, 9 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 969 (1931).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Judgment affirmed.-,.,) (1) Stange v. United States, ante, p. 270; Aiken, Administratrix, v. Burnet, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, ante, p. 277; W. P. Brown & Sons Lumber Company v. Burnet, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, ante, p. 283; Burnet, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, v. Chicago Railway Equipment Co., ante, p. 295. (2) Graham v. Goodcell, ante, p. 409; Mascot Oil Com[812]*812pany, Inc., v. United States ante, p. 434.

Mr. Sidney P. Simpson, with whom Messrs. A. C. Rearick and Theodore B. Benson were on the brief, for petitioner. Assistant Attorney General Rugg, with whom Solicitor General Thacher and: Messrs. Claude R. Branch, Special Assistant to the Attorney General, Lisle A. Smith, Bradley B. Gilman, and Erwin N. Griswold were on the brief, for the United States.

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

Per Curiam:

Judgment affirmed.-,.,) (1) Stange v. United States, ante, p. 270; Aiken, Administratrix, v. Burnet, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, ante, p. 277; W. P. Brown & Sons Lumber Company v. Burnet, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, ante, p. 283; Burnet, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, v. Chicago Railway Equipment Co., ante, p. 295. (2) Graham v. Goodcell, ante, p. 409; Mascot Oil Com[812]*812pany, Inc., v. United States ante, p. 434.

Mr. Sidney P. Simpson, with whom Messrs. A. C. Rearick and Theodore B. Benson were on the brief, for petitioner. Assistant Attorney General Rugg, with whom Solicitor General Thacher and: Messrs. Claude R. Branch, Special Assistant to the Attorney General, Lisle A. Smith, Bradley B. Gilman, and Erwin N. Griswold were on the brief, for the United States.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 U.S. 811, 75 L. Ed. 727, 51 S. Ct. 197, 1931 U.S. LEXIS 930, 9 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 969, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roy-titcomb-inc-v-united-states-scotus-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack