Skip to content


United States Vs. Billings - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number232 U.S. 289
AppellantUnited States
RespondentBillings
Excerpt:
united states v. billings - 232 u.s. 289 (1914) u.s. supreme court united states v. billings, 232 u.s. 289 (1914) united states v. billings no. 626 and 67 argued january 6, 7, 1914 decided february 2, 1914 232 u.s. 289 certificate from the circuit court of appeals for the second circuit syllabus decided on authority of billings v. united states, ante, p. 232 u. s. 261 . 190 f. 359 modified and affirmed. the facts are stated in the opinion. mr. chief justice white delivered the opinion of the court. these two cases are controlled by the two cases between the same parties, just decided. in the case which is here on error, the suit was brought by the united states to recover the amount of.....
Judgment:
United States v. Billings - 232 U.S. 289 (1914)
U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Billings, 232 U.S. 289 (1914)

United States v. Billings

No. 626 and 67

Argued January 6, 7, 1914

Decided February 2, 1914

232 U.S. 289

CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

Syllabus

Decided on authority of Billings v. United states, ante, p. 232 U. S. 261 .

190 F. 359 modified and affirmed.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

These two cases are controlled by the two cases between the same parties, just decided. In the case which is here on error, the suit was brought by the United States to recover the amount of the tax which became due upon the yacht Vanadis on the 1st day of September, 1910, under the Act of August 5th, 1909, which was under consideration in the previous cases. The complaint, leaving aside some additional averments which it is unnecessary to refer to, was the same as the one in the cases already passed upon, and this is true also of the answer. The case

Page 232 U. S. 290

by stipulation was submitted to the court without a jury, and the steps essential to save all the questions in the case were properly taken. The use of the vessel during the taxing period was shown. There was a judgment in favor of the United States for the amount of the tax, but against it for interest, and error was prosecuted from the circuit court of appeals to review that subject, and such case is here on certificate. Taking jurisdiction of both cases and treating them as one, as was done in the previous cases, and applying the conclusions in those cases expressed, to this, it results that the judgment below must be modified, so far as the interest is concerned, by allowing the claim of the United States in that respect, and in other respects it must be affirmed.

And it is so ordered.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //