Wistar v. Commissioner

42 F.2d 192, 8 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 11
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedJune 9, 1930
DocketNos. 274, 275
StatusPublished

This text of 42 F.2d 192 (Wistar v. Commissioner) 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
Wistar v. Commissioner, 42 F.2d 192, 8 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 11 (2d Cir. 1930).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The petitioners are alleged to be inhabitants, Wistar, of New Jersey, and Underhill, of Pennsylvania. There are no stipulations in the records that the petitions shall be heard by this court. That would, however, make no difference, since we have held in Massachusetts Eire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Commissioner, 42 F.(2d) 189, handed down June 9, 1930, that section 1225 (d) of title 26, U. S. Code (26 USCA § 1225(d), does not allow the parties to choose the venue of such eases at their pleasure in any Circuit Court of Appeals. On the authority of that decision, the petitions are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Petitions dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
42 F.2d 192, 8 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 11, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wistar-v-commissioner-ca2-1930.