TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Gulf Oil Corp. v. Grady

In re CONKLIN GULF OIL CORPORATION v. GRADY

Gulf Oil Corp. v. Grady, 110 F.2d 178 (2d Cir. 1940)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
March 4, 1940
Docket
No. 248
Judges
Hand, Patterson, Swan
Citations
110 F.2d 1781940 U.S. App. LEXIS 4502

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PER CURIAM.

The bankrupts, operators of a gasoline filling station, purchased from the appellant for resale 1,700 gallons of gasoline. The New York Tax Law, Consol.Laws. N.Y. 'c. 60, Article 12-A, § 282 ff., imposed a tax upon this transaction. This tax, amounting to $68, was paid to the state by the appellant, who now seeks to recover the sum from the bankrupts’ estate as a claim entitled to priority under § 64 of the Bankruptcy Act, as amended, 52 Stat. 874 , 11 U.S.C.A. § 104 . The claim was allowed as a general claim, but denied any priority.

There is no basis for the claimed priority. The appellant was a “distributor” of motor fuel as defined in Article 12-A, and the statute makes the distributor, not the purchaser, the taxpayer, even though the declared intention of § 289-c is to place the ultimate burden of the tax on those persons who use the motor fuel for the operation of motor vehicles on the highways. See In re Riemer, 2 Cir., 82 F.2d 162, 163 . There is no provision in the New York statute under which the state may collect the gasoline tax from the purchaser or “owner”. Hence the theory of subrogation is without foundation; the distributor cannot get subrogation by the payment of what is its own obligation. The cases dealing with the statutes of other states upon which the appellant relies involve statutes in which the state could have filed its tax claim in the bankruptcy proceeding. The debt which the bankrupts here owe the appellant is not one “for taxes legally due and owing by the bankrupt to * * * any state;” for in any event the bankrupt could not be considered the primary taxpayer. See in re Waller, D.C., 142 F. 883 ; Nolte v. Hudson Nav. Co., *179 2 Cir., 8 F.2d 859 ; cf. New York City v. Goldstein, 299 U.S. 522 , 57 S.Ct. 321 , 81 L.Ed. 384 ; Matter of Atlas Television Co., 273 N.Y. 51 , 6 N.E.2d 94 .

Order affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1940: 31941: 31962: 11963: 11964: 119402026peak 1940 · 3

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 5

DepthCaseCited by
In re Atlas Television Co., 6 N.E.2d 94 (N.Y. 1936) 51
N.Y. City v. Goldstein, 299 U.S. 522 (1937) 11
Nolte v. Hudson Nav. Co., 8 F.2d 859 (2d Cir. 1925) 22
In re Riemer, 82 F.2d 162 (2d Cir. 1936) 9
In re Waller, 142 F. 883 (D. Maryland 1905) 8

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