United States v. Woodworth

170 F.2d 1019, 1948 U.S. App. LEXIS 2765
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedDecember 1, 1948
Docket6, Docket 20600
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 170 F.2d 1019 (United States v. Woodworth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Woodworth, 170 F.2d 1019, 1948 U.S. App. LEXIS 2765 (2d Cir. 1948).

Opinion

FRANK, Circuit Judge.

1. The appellants contend that, as this suit was for an injunction restraining the collection of a state tax, the district court, Because of the last sentence of 28 U.S.C.A. § 41(1) [now § 1341], lacked jurisdiction. We cannot agree. We think Congress did not intend this statutory provision, added by amendment in 1937, to apply to the United States which was not specifically named therein. United States v. United Mine Workers, 330 U.S. 258, 272, 273, 67 S.Ct. 677, 91 L.Ed. 884. The Committee reports support this interpretation. 1 See also City of Springfield v. United States, 1 Cir., 99 F.2d 860; United States v. Okaloosa County, D. C., 59 F.Supp. 426.

2. We reject appellants’ contention that a three-judge court was necessary, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 380 [now §- 2281]. For here the United States did not seek a temporary injunction. Ayrshire Collieries Corp. v. United States, 331 U.S. 132, 140-144, 67 S.Ct. 1168, 91 L.Ed. 1391. 2

3. Land owned by the federal government is not, without its consent, manifested by a Congressional enactment, subject to state taxation, regardless of whether jurisdiction over the land has been ceded to the federal government. Van Brocklin v. State of Tennessee, 117 U.S. 151, 180, 6 S.Ct. 670, 29 L.Ed. 845. This is true even when the .tax has been levied before the acquisition by the United States, -if, as here, the tax had not previously become a lien. United States v. City of Buffalo, 2 Cir., 54 F.2d 471, 473.

Affirmed.

1

S. Rep. No. 1035, H. Rep. No. 1503, 75th Cong. 1st Sess.

2

Judgment here was entered February 11, 1947, and notice of appeal was given March 8, 1947; accordingly, the amendments to the statute, now found in 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 2281-2284, are inapplicable.

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

Related

United States v. Benton
729 F. Supp. 671 (W.D. Missouri, 1990)
Matter of Estate of Novotny
446 F. Supp. 1027 (S.D. New York, 1978)
CONFEDERATED SALISH & KOOTENAI TRIBES, MONT. v. Moe
392 F. Supp. 1297 (D. Montana, 1975)
United States v. State Tax Commission
481 F.2d 963 (First Circuit, 1973)
United States v. City of Glen Cove, Long Island, New York
322 F. Supp. 149 (E.D. New York, 1971)
United States v. Sullivan
270 F. Supp. 236 (D. Connecticut, 1967)
Department of Employment v. United States
385 U.S. 355 (Supreme Court, 1966)
United States v. Bureau of Revenue
291 F.2d 677 (Tenth Circuit, 1961)
United States v. Department of Revenue of State of Ill.
191 F. Supp. 723 (N.D. Illinois, 1961)
United States v. Dughi
180 F. Supp. 118 (S.D. New York, 1960)
United States v. Livingston
179 F. Supp. 9 (E.D. South Carolina, 1959)
United States v. City of New York
175 F.2d 75 (Second Circuit, 1949)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
170 F.2d 1019, 1948 U.S. App. LEXIS 2765, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-woodworth-ca2-1948.