Whetstone v. United States

82 F. Supp. 478, 37 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1081, 1948 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3147
CourtDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois
DecidedNovember 15, 1948
DocketNo. 48 C 64
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 82 F. Supp. 478 (Whetstone v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Whetstone v. United States, 82 F. Supp. 478, 37 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1081, 1948 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3147 (N.D. Ill. 1948).

Opinion

LA BUY, District Judge.

Plaintiff’s action is brought to (1) recover alleged overpayment of income taxes from 1943 through 1946, (2) to remove lien for income taxes, and (3) for declaratory relief. The government has filed a motion to dismiss the action for lack of jurisdiction based upon lack of justiciability, 'failure of consent to be sued, and removal [479]*479of federal tax actions from declaratory relief.

The court is of the opinion this motion should be sustained. Plaintiff’s principal contention is that the revenue turned to the Treasury from the collection of taxes is being expended for seven purposes, none of which are within the purview of the Constitution, and that said unlawful use of this revenue renders the income tax assessed illegal. Congress alone has the power to appropriate money to promote the general welfare and its determination that certain projects are in furtherance of general welfare is decisive. Courts are not concerned with the wisdom of legislative policies, their only function being to interpret the statutes so as to promote and effectuate the disclosed intent of Congress.

The factual situation presented by this complaint does not present a justiciable controversy, nor does it appear that Congress had consented to a suit against the United States for the removal of a tax lien except upon compliance with Section 3679, 26 U.S.C.A., or a release thereof upon compliance with Section 3673, nor can this court within the jurisdiction granted by Congress give declaratory relief where it has been expressly withheld from jurisdiction. For these reasons, the court sustains the motion of the government to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint.

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

Related

Pfluger v. Commissioner
1986 T.C. Memo. 78 (U.S. Tax Court, 1986)
John W. Crowe v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
396 F.2d 766 (Eighth Circuit, 1968)
Crowe v. Commissioner
1967 T.C. Memo. 166 (U.S. Tax Court, 1967)
C. George Swallow v. United States
325 F.2d 97 (Tenth Circuit, 1963)
Peacock v. United States
175 F. Supp. 645 (D. Idaho, 1959)
Sauber, Director of Internal Revenue v. Whetstone
199 F.2d 520 (Seventh Circuit, 1952)
Jarecki, Collector of Internal Revenue v. Whetstone
192 F.2d 121 (Seventh Circuit, 1951)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
82 F. Supp. 478, 37 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1081, 1948 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3147, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whetstone-v-united-states-ilnd-1948.