HELVERING, COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

v.

ASHLAND OIL & REFINING CO.; AND ASHLAND OIL & REFINING CO. V. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

Citator

Cited By (16 total)

• Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (U.S. 1963)
  …cannot be sure which Constitution was invoked by the court below and thus whether the State, the only party aggrieved by this portion of the judgment, could even bring the issue here if it desired to do so. See New York City v. Central Savings Bank, 306 U. S. 661; Minnesota v. National Tea Co., 309 U. S. 551. But in any event, there is no cross-petition by the. State, nor has it challenged the correctness of the ruling below that a new trial on punishment' was called for by the requirements of due process. I…
• Minnesota v. Nat'l TEA Co., 309 U.S. 551 (U.S. 1940)
  …e court rests-on two'grounds, one involving a federal question and the other not, this Court will not take jurisdiction. Fox Film Corp. v. Muller, 296 U. S. 207; Lynch v. New York ex rel. Pierson, 293 U. S. 52; New York City v. Central Savings Bank, 306 U. S. 661. In support of this position they point to the court’s discussion'of the Minnesota constitution and to the fact that the syllabus states that such a tax is violative of both the federal and state constitutions.6 But as to the latter, we are not refe…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• J. D. Hedin Constr. Co., Inc. v. The United States, 408 F.2d 424 (Ct. Cl. 1969)
  …cial world in general to obtain material to perform the contract he has no cause to suspect that such instrumentalities will fail in the discharge of their duties.” H. B. Nelson Constr. Co. v. United States, 87 Ct.Cl. 375, 389 (1938), cert. denied, 306 U.S. 661, 59 S.Ct. 786, 83 L.Ed. 1058 (1939). The commissioner also rejected, as without the support of substantial evidence, the administrative findings that much of the delay during this time was due to plaintiff’s unsatisfactory relations with its ready-…