§
Rogers v. Comm'r

5 Cited authorities

  1. Brewster v. Gage

    280 U.S. 327 (1930)   Cited 386 times
    In Brewster v. Gage, 280 U.S. 327, 50 S.Ct. 115, 74 L.Ed. 457, the question here before us was not considered; it is to be noted, too, that Brewster v. Gage was relied upon in this court in reaching its reversed decision in the Gambrill case.

  2. Ray Copper Co. v. United States

    268 U.S. 373 (1925)   Cited 35 times
    In Ray Consolidated Copper Co. v. United States, 268 U.S. 373, 376-377, the court said of the capital stock tax imposed by the Revenue Act of 1918: "The tax is a special excise imposed on the privilege of carrying on business in the form of a corporation.

  3. In re Stoddard Bros. Lumber Co.

    169 F. 190 (D. Idaho 1909)   Cited 4 times

    No Docket Number March 20, 1909 C. H. Finn, Hawley, Puckett Hawley, and Frank Estabrook, for George Stoddard. L. F. Clinton, Neal Kinyon, Griffiths Griffiths, and Rice, Thompson Buckner, for objecting creditors. DIETRICH, District Judge 1. PARTNERSHIP (§ 241*) — RETIRING PARTNER-LIABILITY FOR FIRM DEBTS — ES-TOPPEL. The principle underlying the responsibility of a partner, who retire? without publishing proper notice, to subsequent creditors of the firm, is that of estoppel, Implying that the partner

  4. Philadelphia, Wilmington, Baltimore Rd. Co. v. Howard

    54 U.S. 307 (1851)   Cited 9 times
    In Howard, the United States Supreme Court held that a corporation was estopped to deny that a written instrument was intended to be a deed of the corporation where the corporation had earlier treated the instrument as bearing the corporate seal, thereby inducing the plaintiff to bring an action upon the instrument, and had prevailed at the earlier trial by asserting that the paper was a valid deed.

  5. Chapman et al. v. Gates

    54 N.Y. 132 (N.Y. 1873)   Cited 12 times

    Argued March 13, 1873 Decided June term, 1873 Samuel Hand for the appellant. Charles Mason for the respondents. LOTT, Ch. C. There was no question made on the trial as to the commission of the acts complained of as obstructions to the road in question, and it was also shown that the defendant was then the owner of and in possession of the land on which they were committed; but the defendant denied that it was subject to a public highway. It was proved that it had been used as such for fifteen years