WEBSTER

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Ross v. United States, 374 F.2d 97 (8th Cir. 1967)
  …8 Cir. 1964), and Hall v. United States, 372 F. 2d 603 (8 Cir. 1967), relating to 18 U.S.C. § 2314, and Roberts v. United States, supra, p. 505 of 331 F. 2d (count two), and Webster v. United States, 59 F. 2d 583, 585-586 (8 Cir. 1932), cert, denied 287 U.S. 629, 53 S.Ct 81, 77 L.Ed. 545, relating to § 472. Mrs. Ross, however, endorsed the checks in her mother’s name, knowing her mother to be deceased, and she did so without embellishment by way of agency or other qualifying designation. This fact contrast…
• Charlson Realty Co. v. The United States, 384 F.2d 434 (Ct. Cl. 1967)
  …s Corp. v. United States, 324 F. 2d 971, 163 Ct.Cl. 219 (1963). The [*450] government may itself invoke such reasoning against a taxpayer: thus in Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Co. v. United States, 19 C.C.P.A. 415, T.D. 45578 (1932), cert. denied, 287 U.S. 629, 53 S.Ct. 82, 77 L.Ed. 546, a statute assessing import duties against articles “imported from any foreign country” was applied to whale oil manufactured on the high seas in a foreign flag vessel, though the oil was not “imported from any foreign cou…
• Select Tire Salvage Co., Inc. v. The United States, 386 F.2d 1008 (Ct. Cl. 1967)
  …); Helvering v. Hammel, 311 U.S. 504, 510-511, 61 S.Ct. 368, 85 L.Ed. 303 (1941); General Dynamics Corp. v. United States, 324 F. 2d 971, 163 Ct.Cl. 219 (1963); Procter & Gamble Mfg. Co. v. United States, 19 CCPA 415, T.D. 45578 (1932), cert. denied 287 U.S. 629, 53 S.Ct. 82, 77 L.Ed. 546; Jennings v. United States, 168 F.Supp. 781, 144 Ct.Cl. 28 (1958). The purpose of a revenue act is to raise revenue, and this was specifically, the purpose of § 602, Revenue Act of 1932, the forerunner of § 4071(a). See H…