TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Armstrong v. War Contracts Price Adjustment Board

Armstrong v. War Contracts Price Adjustment Bd., 194 F.2d 875 (D.C. Cir. 1952)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
January 17, 1952
Docket
No. 10973-4
Judges
Edgerton, Miller, Per Curiam, Prettyman, Wilbur
Citations
194 F.2d 87590 U.S. App. D.C. 1521952 U.S. App. LEXIS 3874

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

These are petitions to review decisions of the Tax Court of the United States in renegotiation cases involving the years 1943 and 1944. Petitioner, an individual with an office in New York City, was during those years employed by several steel companies as a salesman on a straight-commission basis. Some of the sales upon which petitioner received his commissions were to companies which had contracts with the Government or were subcontractors under such contracts. The War Contracts Price Adjustment Board redetermined petitioner’s profits from such commissions. He petitioned the Tax Court for a redetermination, principally upon the ground that he was not a subcontractor within the meaning of the Renegotiation Act.

The Renegotiation Act of 1943 1

provides, in pertinent part:

“(5) The term ‘subcontract’ means— i{e $ í¡í % ijí “(B) Any contract or arrangement * * * (i) any amount payable under which is contingent upon the procurement of a contract or contracts with a Department or of a subcontract or subcontracts, or determined with reference to the amount of such a contract or subcontract * * 2

Judge Disney of the Tax Court made detailed findings of fact and promulgated an exhaustive opinion upon the point.

3

We agree with his views, and upon that basis the decisions of the Tax Court are affirmed.

The Government says that this court does not have jurisdiction to review the decisions of the Tax Court. However, we are of opinion that the question presented concerns the jurisdiction of the Tax Court, and therefore we have jurisdiction to review the point.

4

Affirmed.

1

. 58 Stat. 78 (1944), as amended, 50 U.S. C.A.Appendix, § 1191.

2

. 58 Stat. 80 -81 (1944), 50 U.S.C.A.App. § 1191(a) (5) (B).

3

. Armstrong v. War Contracts Price Adjustment Board, 1950, 15 T.C. 625 .

4

. U. S. Electrical Motors v. Jones, 1946, 80 U.S.App.D.C. 329 , 153 F.2d 134 ; Ring Const. Corporation v. Secretary of War, 1949, 85 U.S.App.D.C. 386 , 178 F.2d 714 , certiorari denied, 1950, 339 U.S. 943 , 70 S.Ct. 796 , 94 L.Ed. 1358 ; Lowell Wool By-Products Co. v. War Contracts Price Adjustment Board, 1951, 89 U.S.App.D.C. -, 192 F.2d 405 .

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1954: 11955: 21957: 11967: 11976: 119542026peak 1955 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. The Ebco Manufacturing Company v. Secretary Of Commerce221 F.2d 902 (6th Cir. 1955)
  2. Metallurgical, Inc. v. The Renegotiation Board382 F.2d 843 (8th Cir. 1967)
  3. A. C. Ball Co. v. United States531 F.2d 993 (Ct. Cl. 1976)
  4. Eastern Woodworks, Inc. v. Vance112 A.2d 231 (Md. 1955)
  5. Edell v. United States28 T.C. 601 (Tax Ct. 1957)
  6. United States v. Bass129 F. Supp. 909 (D. Minnesota 1954)

Most recent

  1. A. C. Ball Co. v. United States531 F.2d 993 (Ct. Cl. 1976)
  2. Metallurgical, Inc. v. The Renegotiation Board382 F.2d 843 (8th Cir. 1967)
  3. Edell v. United States28 T.C. 601 (Tax Ct. 1957)
  4. The Ebco Manufacturing Company v. Secretary Of Commerce221 F.2d 902 (6th Cir. 1955)
  5. Eastern Woodworks, Inc. v. Vance112 A.2d 231 (Md. 1955)
  6. United States v. Bass129 F. Supp. 909 (D. Minnesota 1954)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
U. S. Elec. Motors, Inc. v. Jones, 153 F.2d 134 (D.C. Cir. 1946) 24
Ring Const. Corp. v. Sec'y of War of United States, 178 F.2d 714 (D.C. Cir. 1949) 19
Lowell Wool By-Prods. Co. v. War Contracts Price Adjustment Bd., 192 F.2d 405 (D.C. Cir. 1951) 18
Armstrong v. War Contracts Price Adjustment Bd., 15 T.C. 625 (Tax Ct. 1950) 4

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list