Rochelle v. United States
William J. ROCHELLE, Jr., Trustee v. United States
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
PER CURIAM:
The trustee points out that it has not received a refund of penalties and that no judgment has been entered for such a refund although, as we pointed out in our opinion, si. op. p. 298, the United States concedes that penalties were not allowable in bankruptcy and states that it so conceded to the trial court. The trustee requests that we enter judgment for the full amount of the penalties. The United States, while reiterating that a refund of penalties is in order, asserts that judgment should be for less than the full amount. Since establishment of the correct amount to be refunded involves both questions of law and the effect of concessions made by the government in the trial court and not in the record before us, as well as concessions made in this court, the matter is for the District Court in the first instance.
*406 The petition of the trustee for rehearing is granted and the mandate is amended to provide that the judgment of the District Court is affirmed in part and reversed in part and the cause is remanded for the entry of a judgment in favor of the trustee in such amount as the District Court finds appropriate.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 13 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
- In re Silver Eagle Co.
- In re Nuclear Imaging Systems, Inc.
- United States v. Cherry Street Partners, L.P. (In re Alliance Health of Fort Worth, Inc.)
- Redmond National Bank v. Aaa Electric Installations, Inc. Bodenhamer/stewart Inc. Amwest Surety Insurance Company
- In re Metropolitan Hospital
- In re Britton
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.