LASH

v.

NIGHOSIAN, REVENUE AGENT, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

Citator

Cited By (21 total)

• Ogden v. United States, 303 F.2d 724 (9th Cir. 1962)
  …FBI, is that correct?” Despite defendant’s earnest argument, 'this exchange, to us, carries no suggestion that “statements” other than those produced had ever existed. Compare United States v. Kelly, 269 F. 2d 448, 452 (10th Cir. 1959), cert. denied 362 U.S. 904, 80 S.Ct. 615, 4 L.Ed.2d 555. . The grand jury transcript is not a “statement” within the meaning of the Jencks Act. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. United States, 360 U.S. 395, 398, 79 S.Ct. 1237, 3 L.Ed.2d 1323 (1959). . See United States v. Proct…
• United States & William L. Hall v. Roundtree, 420 F.2d 845 (5th Cir. 1969)
  …s solely to the issue of correctness”. Boren v. Tucker, 9 Cir.1956, 239 F. 2d 767, 772. So long as the IRS does have this purpose, other purposes need not vitiate its authority. Lash v. Nighosian, 1 Cir. 1959, 273 F. 2d 185, 188, cert. denied, 1960, 362 U.S. 904, 80 S.Ct. 610, 4 L. Ed.2d 554; see United States v. Mercurio, 5 Cir. Oct. 30, 1969, 418 F. 2d 1213. In light of the fact that the IRS has filed deficiency notices for all of the years in question,13 the taxpayer faces a difficult task in proving th…
• Royal G. Bouschor v. United States, 316 F.2d 451 (8th Cir. 1963)
  …an appeal lies”. All other courts of appeals which have touched upon the question appear, with one exception, to be in accord. O’Connor v. O’Connell, 1 Cir., 1958, 253 F. 2d 365-367; Lash v. Nighosian, 1 Cir., 1959, 273 F. 2d 185, 186, cert. denied 362 U.S. 904, 80 S.Ct. 610, 4 L.Ed.2d 554; In re Albert Lindley Lee Memorial Hosp., 2 Cir., 1953, 209 F. 2d 122, 123, cert. denied 347 U.S. 960, 74 S.Ct. 709, 98 L.Ed. 1104; Application of Colton, 2 Cir., 1961, 291 F. 2d 487, 490-491; United States v. McDonald,…