Kelly v. United States
Decision Date | 29 June 1936 |
Docket Number | No. 7942.,7942. |
Parties | KELLY v. UNITED STATES et al. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Ralph O. Olson, of Bellingham, Wash., and Stratton & Kane, of Seattle, Wash., for appellant.
Frank J. Wideman, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Sewall Key, Clarence E. Dawson, and Frank J. Ready, Jr., Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen., and J. Charles Dennis, U. S. Atty., and Gerald Shucklin, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Seattle, Wash., for appellees the United States and others.
Before WILBUR, MATHEWS, and HANEY, Circuit Judges.
Appellant's petition for rehearing states that this court erred in failing to review the question presented and raised by appellant's specifications of error numbered I, II, and III; that this was the only question passed on by the District Court; and that the consideration thereof would not require an examination of the evidence. These specifications are as follows:
The question which these specifications attempt to raise is whether the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals therein referred to was binding and conclusive on the District Court. No such question is presented by the record. The record does not indicate that appellee's claim was founded on any decision of the Board of Tax Appeals, or that it had been the subject of any such decision, or that any such decision was pleaded, proved, or otherwise brought to the attention of the District Court, or that the District Court considered or determined the effect of any such decision. The judgment appealed from reads as follows:
There is no reference to any decision of...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Schuler v. State
...In In Re Carlisle Packing Co., 12 F.Supp. 11, 14 (W.D.Wash.1935), aff'd sub nom. Kelly v. United States, 83 F.2d 783, reh'g denied 84 F.2d 541 (9th Cir.), cert. granted 299 U.S. 528, 57 S.Ct. 42, 81 L.Ed. 389 (1936), rev'd on other grounds 300 U.S. 50, 57 S.Ct. 335, 81 L.Ed. 507 (1937), the......