JAMES TODD, APPELLANT,

v.

OTIS DANIELL, DEFENDANT

Citator

Cited By

• N.Y. Cnty. Nat'l Bank v. Massey, 192 U.S. 138 (U.S. 1904)
• Marvel v. Zerbst, 83 F.2d 974 (10th Cir. 1936)
  ….A. 10) 83 F.(2d) 973, decided May 11, 1938; Ex parte Cuddy, Petitioner, 131 U.S. 280, 9 S.Ct. 703, 33 L.Ed. 154; Gentry v. State of Missouri (C.C.A. 8) 32 F.(2d) 159, 161; Archer v. Heath (C.C.A. 9) 30 F.(2d) 932; Williams v. U.S., 1 How. 290, 300, 11 L.Ed. 135; Stockslager v. U.S. (C.C.A. 9) 116 F. 590; 595; Lewis v. U.S., 279 U.S. 63, 73, 49 S.Ct. 257, 73 L.Ed. 615. See Buthenberg v. U.S., 245 U.S. 480, 482, 38 S.Ct. 168, 169, 62 L.Ed. 414; Clement v. U.S. (C.C.A. 8) 149 F. 305 (Cert. denied 206 U.S. 56…
• Sabin v. United States, 44 F.2d 70 (Ct. Cl. 1930)
  …e and approval of the Secretary, unless the contrary appears.” Roxford Knitting Co. v. Moore & Tierney, Inc. (C. C. A.) 265 F. 177, 190, 11 A. L. R. 1415. See also Wilcox v. Jackson, 13 Pet. 498, 10 L. Ed. 264; Williams v. United States, 1 How. 290, 11 L. Ed. 135. The letters to the taxpayer and to the supervising agent in charge with reference to the waiver went out from the commissioner’s office in the regular course of business. Since there is no evidence that they were not written with his knowledge and…