Hollister v. United States, L-4916.

Decision Date13 February 1941
Docket NumberNo. L-4916.,L-4916.
Citation38 F. Supp. 7
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Washington
PartiesHOLLISTER et al. v. UNITED STATES.

James A. Brown, of Spokane, Wash., for plaintiffs.

Lyle Keith, Dist. Atty., and Harvey Erickson, Asst. Dist. Atty., both of Spokane, Wash., for defendant.

SCHWELLENBACH, District Judge.

This action is brought by plaintiffs to recover from the Government $2,081.27, plus interest, being the amount paid by the plaintiffs as documentary stamp tax under the provisions of Schedule A —3, Title VIII, § 800 et seq., of the Revenue Act of 1926as amended, 26 U.S.C.A. Int.Rev. Acts, page 289.The following facts are not in dispute:

November 15, 1933, plaintiffs entered into an agreement with the Washington Trust Company, a corporation, which had as its purpose the protection of the continuity of operation of Hollister-Stier Laboratories, a corporation, after the death of either of them.This agreement provided that all of the shares of stock in the Hollister-Stier Laboratories owned by each of the plaintiffs would be endorsed in blank and deposited with the Trustee for delivery to the survivor upon the death of either of the plaintiffs.In compliance with that agreement each plaintiff did endorse in blank his certificate in the corporation evidencing ownership of 24,782 shares of the capital stock of the corporation and deposited the same with the trustee.No documentary stamp tax was paid on the transaction until it was regularly assessed and collected by the Bureau of Internal Revenue.

All preliminary steps from the commencement of this action were concededly taken by the taxpayers.In this action the taxpayers seek the refund of the taxes paid by them under protest.

The 1932amendment to the Revenue Act, 47 Stat. 272, 26 U.S.C.A. Int.Rev.Acts, page 630, lays a tax "on all sales, or agreements to sell, or memoranda of sales or deliveries of, or transfers of legal title to any of the shares or certificates * * * or by any assignment in blank, or by any delivery, or by any paper or agreement or memorandum or other evidence of transfer or sale (whether entitling the holder in any manner to the benefit of such share, certificate, interest, or rights, or not)."The statute by specific proviso exempts from the tax (1) the deposit of certificates as collateral security, (2) delivery or transfers to a broker or from a broker to a customer, (3) deliveries or transfers from a fiduciary to a nominee of such fiduciary or from one nominee of such...

To continue reading

Request your trial

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex
5 cases
  • Birmingham v. Central Life Assur. Soc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • 8 Marzo 1944
    ...every delivery, of bonds is taxable the Collector cites Occidental Life Ins. Co. v. Rogan, D.C.Cal., 48 F.Supp. 231; Hollister v. United States, D.C. Wash., 38 F.Supp. 7; Cliffs Corp. v. United States, 6 Cir., 103 F.2d 77; Dupont v. United States, 300 U.S. 150, 57 S.Ct. 391, 81 L.Ed. 570; P......
  • Gay v. Inter-County Tel. & Tel. Co.
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 18 Julio 1952
    ...v. Hoey, 300 U.S. 268, 57 S.Ct. 457, 81 L.Ed. 639; California Electric Co. v. U. S., 57 F.Supp. 957, 102 Ct.Cl. 497; Hollister v. United States, D.C., 38 F.Supp. 7; and many other federal cases, in support of its contention that the corporation is liable for the payment of the tax. The appe......
  • United States v. Johnston
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of West Virginia
    • 4 Marzo 1941
  • United States v. Travis, 370.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Kentucky
    • 19 Junio 1946
    ...parties a hardship. This apparent hardship was noticed by the Court in the case of United States v. Johnston supra, where the court said 38 F.Supp. 7: "This is a situation which should be remedied, but it can only be done by an act of This Court has jurisdiction of the parties and subject m......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT