Bankers Trust Co. & Leonard M. Wallstein, as Executors of the Will of Charles Newman, Deceased v. United States, 299 F.2d 936 (2d Cir. 1962). · Go Syfert
Search
Bankers Trust Co. & Leonard M. Wallstein, as Executors of the Will of Charles Newman, Deceased v. United States, 299 F.2d 936 (2d Cir. 1962). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
13 citation events across 8 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Seder v. Commissioner (tax, 1973-04-05)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Seder v. Commissioner
Tax Ct. · 1973 · confidence medium
Sec. 1.170-1(e), Income *54 Tax Regs. ; Commissioner v. Sternberger's Estate, supra at 194 ; Davison v. Commissioner , 81 F. 2d 16 , 17 (C.A. 2, 1936), affirming 31 B.T.A. 101 (1934) ; Banker's Trust Co. v. United States , 190 F. Supp. 671 , 675 (S.D.N.Y. 1960) , affirmed per curiam 299 F. 2d 936 *162 (C.A. 2, 1962).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Bankers Trust Company and Leonard M. Wallstein, as Executors of the Will of Charles Newman, Deceased
v.
United States
26899.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Mar 9, 1962.
299 F.2d 936
Published

299 F.2d 936

62-1 USTC P 12,066

BANKERS TRUST COMPANY and Leonard M. Wallstein, as Executors
of the Will of Charles Newman, Deceased,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 260, Docket 26899.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued March 9, 1962.
Decided March 9, 1962.

Wallstein, Menschel & Wallstein, New York City (Leonard Wallstein, Jr., New York City, of counsel), for plaintiffs-appellants.

Robert M. Morgenthau, U.S. Atty. (Robert Arum, Vincent L. Broderick, David Klingsberg, Asst. U.S. Attys., of counsel), for defendant-appellee.

Before WATERMAN, KAUFMAN and MARSHALL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

1

Plaintiffs, as executors of the Estate of Charles Newman, appeal from a summary judgment granted by the court below, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint in an action for the recovery of estate taxes claimed to have been erroneously collected, and also appeal from a subsequent order of the same court denying plaintiffs' motion under Fed.R.Civ.Proc. 60(b), 28 U.S.C.A. for relief from that judgment.

2

The district court judgment and the subsequent order denying relief therefrom are affirmed on the studiously reasoned opinions of Judge Palmieri below, 190 F.Supp. 671 (S.D.N.Y.1960), and 191 F.Supp. 792 (S.D.N.Y.1961).