United States v. Daniels

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Ohio

United States v. Daniels

25 F. Cas. 752, 20 Int. Rev. Rec. 136

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Ohio·Decided July 1, 1874·Published

Opinion

On motion for a new trial.

The firm of Daniels and Son on the 1st day of May, 1S73. paid a special tax for the business of wholesale dealers in liquor at San-dusky. The firm consisted of Eve Daniels, the mother, and George Daniels, the son. In August, 1873, Eve died, leaving George her only heir and representative, and also-surviving partner, who continued the business at the same place for the remainder of the year in the name of Daniels and Son. Held, that having paid the tax for the whole year, George Daniels was not required to do so again under the law, on the death of his mother and partner, and .having been convicted a new trial is granted herein.

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

On motion for a new trial.

The firm of Daniels and Son on the 1st day of May, 1S73. paid a special tax for the business of wholesale dealers in liquor at San-dusky. The firm consisted of Eve Daniels, the mother, and George Daniels, the son. In August, 1873, Eve died, leaving George her only heir and representative, and also-surviving partner, who continued the business at the same place for the remainder of the year in the name of Daniels and Son. Held, that having paid the tax for the whole year, George Daniels was not required to do so again under the law, on the death of his mother and partner, and .having been convicted a new trial is granted herein.

United States v. Daniels, 25 F. Cas. 752, 20 Int. Rev. Rec. 136 (circtndoh 1874).

Pincite

25 F. Cas. 752 (United States v. Daniels) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.