UNITED STATES
v.
RIMER
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The United States sought Supreme Court review of a lower court decision regarding internal revenue tax collection, claiming it established a principle that would overturn long-standing administrative practices. After closer examination of the record, the Supreme Court determined that the lower court's decision did not actually involve the significant principle the Government initially identified and that review was therefore outside the scope of certiorari authority. The Court dismissed the writ of certiorari without reaching the merits of the case.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Chief Justice White delivered the opinion of the court.
The petition presented by the United States in this case for the allowance of a writ of certiorari, which was not opposed, proceeded upon the basis that the decision below involved a principle concerning the collection of internal revenue taxes of far-reaching importance, and which if thereafter applied in accordance with what it was urged was the rule established by the lower court would over throw practices prevailing as to the collection of internal revenue taxes for a long period of time, founded upon a well settled administrative construction, and thus produce at least great confusion.
As the record at least prima facie tended to sustain these contentions of the Government, the writ of certiorari was granted. With candor, in the argument at bar, while perspicuously discussing the legal propositions which it was deemed were involved when the certiorari was petitioned for, the Government conceded that a closer scrutiny of the record made it exceedingly doubtful whether the action of the court below, when accurately tested, dealt with the principle, which, it was deemed, rendered the granting of the writ necessary. Coming to consider the record, we conclude that it establishes that the doubt suggested by the Government is well founded, and, therefore, if we were to consider and decide, the case we would but review the action of the court below in regard to a question as to which, under the Judiciary Act of 1891, the action of the court was final, and which, neither from its character or importance, was within the scope of the grant of power to review by certiorari.
After giving the matter most careful consideration because of the precedent as to future cases which must arise from the action we take in this, we have concluded that, under the conditions which we have stated, our duty is not to pass upon the merits of the case, but to dismiss the writ of certiorari. Our order will therefore be
Writ of certiorari dismissed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McALLISTER v. United States, 348 U.S. 19 (U.S. 1954)…judication of those cases, inevitably abundant, for which the Court sits, the Court has again and again dismissed the writ as improviden'tly granted after a preliminary and necessarily tentative consideration of the petition. United States v. Rimer, 220 U. S. 547; Furness, Withy & Co. v. Yang-Tsze Ins. Assn., 242 U. S. 430; Tyrrell v. District of Columbia, 243 U. S. 1; Layne & Bowler Corp. v. Western Well Works, Inc., 261 U. S. 387; Southern Power Co. v. North Carolina Pub. Serv. Co., 263 U. S. 508; Keller v…
-
Dick v. N.Y. Life Ins. Co., 359 U.S. 437 (U.S. 1959)…3; In re Woods, 143 U. S. 202; Lau Ow Bew v. United States, 144 U. S. 47; American Construction Co. v. Jacksonville, T. & K. W. R. Co., 148 U. S. 372; Forsyth v. Hammond, 166 U. S. 506; Fields v. United States, 205 U. S. 292; United States v. Rimer, 220 U. S. 547. On March 27, 1893, two years after the enactment of the Evarts Act, the Court could write that only two petitions for certio-rari had been granted. American Construction Co. v. Jacksonville, T. & K. W. R. Co., supra, at 383. See cases cited, note…
-
Rice v. Sioux City Mem'l Park Cemetery, Inc., 349 U.S. 70 (U.S. 1955)…se. Cf. District of Columbia v. Sweeney, 310 U. S. 631, where cer-tiorari was denied “in view of the fact that the tax is laid under a statute which has been repealed and the question is therefore not of public importance.” United States v. Rimer, 220 U. S. 547; Furness, Withy & Co. v. Yang-Tsze Ins. Assn., 242 U. S. 430; Tyrrell v. District of Columbia, 243 U. S. 1; Houston Oil Co. v. Goodrich, 245 U. S. 440; Layne & Bowler Corp. v. Western Well Works, Inc., 261 U. S. 387; Southern Rower Co. v. North Caro…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence