Robique v. Lambert
ROBIQUE Et Al. v. LAMBERT
Opinion
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a judgment entered under Section 3653, 26 U.S.C.A., in the consolidated causes dismissing for want of jurisdiction suits appellants had brought to restrain the appellee from levying and collecting a special tax of $250.00 on coin operated pin ball machines.
Appellant is here urging upon us:
(1) that within the teachings of Miller v. Standard Nut Margarine Co., 284 U.S. 498 , 52 S.Ct. 260 , 76 L.Ed. 422 , this case presents an exception to the operation of the statute; and (2) that the statute is unconstitutional.
We think it clear that neither of these positions is well taken.
The district judge, in a carefully considered opinion, 1
has set out the issues joined and the reasons supporting the judgment. Because we find ourselves in full agreement not only with the result reached but with the reasons given by him, we will content ourselves with saying so and will not further labor the matter.
The judgment is right. It is affirmed.
1
. Robique v. Lambert (Kapsos v. Lambert), D.C., 114 F.Supp. 305 .
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 9 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- E. C. Lloyd v. George D. Patterson, District Director of Internal Revenue, District of Alabama
- Lassoff v. Gray
- United States v. Curd
- J. L. Enochs, District Director of Internal Revenue v. Williams Packing & Navigation Co., Inc.
- Noel Smith v. Ernest M. Flinn, Director of Internal Revenue
- Sam G. McDonald v. Robert L. Phinney, Director of Internal Revenue, First District of Texas, and the United States
Most recent
- Barnum v. United States
- Lassoff v. Gray
- J. L. Enochs, District Director of Internal Revenue v. Williams Packing & Navigation Co., Inc.
- Sam G. McDonald v. Robert L. Phinney, Director of Internal Revenue, First District of Texas, and the United States
- Nussbaumer v. United States
- Noel Smith v. Ernest M. Flinn, Director of Internal Revenue
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.