United States v. Zschach Const. Co.
| Decision Date | 11 January 1954 |
| Docket Number | No. 4714.,4714. |
| Citation | 209 F.2d 347 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES v. ZSCHACH CONST. CO. et al. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit |
S. Dee Hanson, Washington, D. C. (H. Brian Holland, Asst. Atty. Gen., Ellis N. Slack, A. F. Prescott, and Dudley J. Godfrey, Jr., Spec. Assts. to the Atty. Gen., and Frank D. McSherry, U. S. Atty., Muskogee, Okl., were with him on the brief), for the United States.
Remington Rogers, Tulsa, Okl., and Maurice M. Thomas, Oklahoma City, Okl. (Ned Looney and Clyde J. Watts, Oklahoma City, Okl., were with them on the brief), for appellees.
Before HUXMAN, MURRAH, and PICKETT, Circuit Judges.
This appeal involves withholding and employment tax liability for the years 1948 and 1949.
The question is whether the court erred in failing to hold Pool Construction Company, the Western Casualty and Surety Company, the North American Casualty and Surety Reinsurance Corporation, and the Excess Insurance Company of America secondarily liable for the unpaid taxes of Zschach Construction Company to the extent of the amounts it deducted from its employees and then failed to pay over to the government.
It is conceded that this case is indistinguishable in fact or in law from that of United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. United States, 10 Cir., 1952, 201 F.2d 118. The government, however, contends that our conclusions in that case are erroneous and asks us to reexamine the question and overrule our former decision. Suffice it to say we have given further consideration to the question presented and a majority of the court adheres to the views expressed in our former decision.
The judgment appealed from is, therefore, Affirmed on authority of United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. United States, 10 Cir., 201 F.2d 118. See, also, General Casualty Co. of America v. United States, 5 Cir., 205 F.2d 753.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Koppers Company v. Continental Casualty Company
...Inc., 211 F.Supp. 749, 750 (E.D.Mo.1962); United States v. Zschach Constr. Co., 110 F.Supp. 551, 552 (E.D.Okl.1953), affirmed, 209 F.2d 347 (10 Cir. 1954). On the other hand, the court in United States for Use and Benefit of Fairbanks Morse & Co. v. Bero Constr. Corp., 148 F.Supp. 295, 298 ......
-
Atlantic Refining Co. v. Continental Casualty Co.
...Const. Co., 4 Cir., 1954, 217 F.2d 275; Westover v. William Simpson Const. Co., 9 Cir., 1954, 209 F.2d 908; United States v. Zschach Const. Co., 10 Cir., 1954, 209 F.2d 347. The pertinent portion of both contracts is as "With respect to all persons at any time employed by or on the payroll ......
-
United States v. Seaboard Surety Company
...States, 205 F.2d 753 (5th Cir., 1953); Westover v. William Simpson Const. Co., 209 F.2d 908 (9th Cir., 1954); United States v. Zschach Const. Co., 209 F.2d 347 (10th Cir., 1954); First National Bank in Yonkers v. City of New York, 177 F.Supp. 175 (S.D.N.Y.1959); and Central Bank v. United S......
-
Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. New York City Housing Auth.
...Surety Co., 6 Cir., 160 F.2d 977; United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. United States, 10 Cir., 201 F.2d 118; United States v. Zschach Const. Co., 10 Cir., 209 F.2d 347; New York Casualty Co. v. Zwerner, D.C.N.D. Ill.E.D., 58 F.Supp. 473; F. H. McGraw & Co. v. Sherman Plastering Co., D.C......
-
Probable Cause in Child Pornography Cases: Does It Mean the Same Thing?
...situation because the possession of music is not unlawful nor does it indicate obtaining the music in an unlawful manner. 370 Matthews , 209 F.2d at 347. 371 United States v. Macomber, 67 M.J. 214, 222 (C.A.A.F. 2009) (Ryan, J., dissenting). 372 United States v. Gourde, 440 F.3d 1065, 1077–......