Rock Island Co v. United States
| Decision Date | 22 November 1920 |
| Docket Number | No. 82,82 |
| Citation | 65 L.Ed. 188,254 U.S. 141,41 S.Ct. 55 |
| Parties | ROCK ISLAND, A. & L. R. CO. v. UNITED STATES |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. Thomas P. Littlepage and Sidney F. Taliaferro, both of Washington, D. C., for appellant.
Mr. Solicitor General Frierson, for the United States.
This is a claim for a sum paid as an internal revenue tax under the Act of August 5, 1909, c. 6, § 38, 36 Stat. 11, 112. It is alleged that the claimant was not engaged in or doing business in the year for which the tax was collected and that therefore it was not due. The Court of Claims dismissed the petition on the ground that the claimant had not complied with the conditions imposed by statute and the claimant appealed to this Court.
The facts are simple. After the tax was assessed a claim for an abatement was sent to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue in July, 1913. On December 18 of the same year the Commissioner rejected the application, whereupon on December 26 the claimant paid the tax with interest and a penalty. So far as appears there was no protest at the time of payment and it is found that after in nothing was done to secure repayment of the tax. By Rev. Sts. § 3226, amended by Act of February 27, 1877, c. 69, § 1, 19 Stat. 248 (Comp. St. § 5949), no suit shall be maintained in any Court for the recovery of any tax alleged to have been illegally assessed 'until appeal shall have been duly made to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, according to the provisions of law in that regard, and the regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury established in pursuance thereof, and a decision of the Commissioner has been had therein, provided,' etc. Regulations of the Secretary established a procedure and a form to be used in applications for abatement of taxes and distinct ones for claims for refunding them. The claimant took the first step but not the last.
By Rev. Sts. § 3220 (Comp. St. § 5944), the Commissioner of Internal Revenue is authorized 'on appeal to him made, to remit, refund, and pay back' taxes illegally assessed. It is urged that the 'appeal' to him to remit made a second appeal to him to refund an idle act and satisfied the requirement of § 3226. Decisions to that effect in suits against a collector are cited, the latest being Loomis v. Wattles (C. C. A.) 266 Fed. 876. But the words 'on appeal to him made' mean, of course, on appeal in respect of the relief sought on appeal—to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Uzuegbu v. Caplinger
...§ 204.1(a)(2)(iii) was promulgated; whatever the effect, it does not apply in this case. 57 Rock Island, A. & L.R. Co. v. United States, 254 U.S. 141, 143, 41 S.Ct. 55, 56, 65 L.Ed. 188 (1920). 58 Perales v. Casillas, 903 F.2d 1043, 1051 (5th 59 Cf. Bolourchian v. INS, 751 F.2d 979, 980 (9t......
-
Packard v. Farmers Ins. of Columbus, Inc.
...funds: Justice Holmes wrote: Men must turn square corners when they deal with the Government. Rock Island, A. & L.R. Co. v. United States, 254 U.S. 141, 143, 41 S.Ct. 55, 56, 65 L.Ed. 188 (1920). This observation has its greatest force when a private party seeks to spend the Government's mo......
-
Dep't of Homeland Sec. v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal.
...Holmes famously wrote that "[m]en must turn square corners when they deal with the Government." Rock Island, A. & L. R. Co. v. United States , 254 U.S. 141, 143, 41 S.Ct. 55, 65 L.Ed. 188 (1920). But it is also true, particularly when so much is at stake, that "the Government should turn sq......
-
Heckler v. Community Health Services of Crawford County, Inc
...IV Justice Holmes wrote: "Men must turn square corners when they deal with the Government." Rock Island, A. & L.R. Co. v. United States, 254 U.S. 141, 143, 41 S.Ct. 55, 56, 65 L.Ed. 188 (1920). This observation has its greatest force when a private party seeks to spend the Government's mone......
-
Waivers Of Minor Informalities, Meaningful Discussions, And A "Dreary Wreck" Of A Procurement (August 2021 Bid Protest Roundup)
...remarked, "Men must turn square corners when they deal with the Government." Rock Island, Arkansas & Louisiana R.R. Co. v. United States, 254 U.S. 141, 143 (1920). Although the low bidder in a FAR Part 14 sealed bid procurement may be entitled to cure minor informalities, offerors in most f......
-
Waivers Of Minor Informalities, Meaningful Discussions, And A "Dreary Wreck" Of A Procurement (August 2021 Bid Protest Roundup)
...remarked, "Men must turn square corners when they deal with the Government." Rock Island, Arkansas & Louisiana R.R. Co. v. United States, 254 U.S. 141, 143 (1920). Although the low bidder in a FAR Part 14 sealed bid procurement may be entitled to cure minor informalities, offerors in most f......
-
Brother, Can You Spare a Million Dollars?': Resurrecting the Justice Department's 'Slush Fund
...by the very people the clause was intended to constrain: executive branch officials. 88. Rock Island A. & L.R. Co. v. United States, 254 U.S. 141, 143 (1920) (Holmes, J.). 89. Richmond , 496 U.S. at 434. 90. See , e.g. , Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006, Pub. L. ......
-
SOL on tax refunds.
...is not necessarily fatal, the courts have not been liberal in sustaining informal refund claims; see Rock Island, A. & L.R. Co., 254 US 141 (1920), in which the Supreme Court disallowed a refund for failure to file a proper claim. Filing an official form is not absolutely required, but ......