United States v. Forst, 569 F.2d 811 (4th Cir. 1978). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Forst, 569 F.2d 811 (4th Cir. 1978). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
22 citation events across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. District of Columbia (cadc, 1981-11-17)
Treatment trajectory · 1978 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1978 2002 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (rule) United States v. District of Columbia (6×) also: Cited "see", Cited "see, e.g."
D.C. Cir. · 1981 · confidence medium
In that case, the contract specifically stated that the contractor acted “as an independent contractor and not as an agent of the Government ...” Id. at 924 (emphasis added). .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. State Of New Mexico (2×) also: Cited "see"
10th Cir. · 1980 · confidence medium
In affirming Forst the Fourth Circuit agreed that "the key factor in the case was whether the credit of the United States or the contractor was bound by the purchasing agreements." 569 F.2d at 811. 21 The argument that the contracts with Sandia, Zia and LACI inherently create agent-principal relationships is also at odds with the contracts discussed in United States v. New Mexico, 581 F.2d 803 (10th Cir. 1978).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
United States of America and Hercules Incorporated
v.
W. H. Forst, as State Tax Commissioner, of and for the Commonwealth of Virginia, and His Successors in Office, Department of Taxation of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and Commonwealth of Virginia, (Two Cases)
77-1395.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Jan 23, 1978.
569 F.2d 811
Published

569 F.2d 811

24 Cont.Cas.Fed. (CCH) 82,069

UNITED STATES of America and Hercules Incorporated, Appellants,
v.
W. H. FORST, as State Tax Commissioner, of and for the
Commonwealth of Virginia, and his successors in office,
Department of Taxation of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and
Commonwealth of Virginia, Appellees (two cases).

Nos. 77-1395 and 77-1722.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Argued Dec. 12, 1977.
Decided Jan. 23, 1978.

Libero Marinelli, Jr., Atty., Tax Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C. (Myron C. Baum, Acting Asst. Atty. Gen., Gilbert E. Andrews and David English Carmack, Attys., Tax Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., Paul R. Thompson, Jr., U. S. Atty., Roanoke, Va., and Edwin C. Stone, Radford, Va., counsel for Hercules Inc., on brief), for appellants.

Glenn R. Moore, Asst. Atty. Gen., Dept. of Taxation, Natural Bridge, Va. (Anthony F. Troy, Atty. Gen. of Virginia, Richmond, Va., on brief), for appellees.

Before FIELD, Senior Circuit Judge, and WIDENER and HALL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

The United States and Hercules Incorporated sought a declaratory judgment that Hercules was not liable to the Commonwealth of Virginia under the Virginia Retail Sales and Use Tax, Code of Va. § 58-441.1, et seq., (1950), upon tangible personal property which was purchased and used by Hercules pursuant to its contract with the Department of the Army to operate the Radford Army Ammunition Plant. Upon cross motions for summary judgment counsel for the plaintiffs conceded that Hercules never acted as an agent for the United States in connection with the purchase or use of the subject property, and the Commonwealth conceded that title to the property never vested in Hercules but passed directly from the vendor to the United States.

2

The district court recognized that the key factor in the case was whether the credit of the United States or the contractor was bound by the purchasing agreements. See Alabama v. King & Boozer, 314 U.S. 1, 62 S.Ct. 43, 86 L.Ed. 3 (1941); Kern-Limerick, Inc. v. Scurlock, 347 U.S. 110, 74 S.Ct. 403, 98 L.Ed. 546 (1954). Finding that Hercules exercised substantial control over the procurement of the property and that only its credit was involved in the purchases, the district court concluded that Hercules was the purchaser and that the Virginia sales and use tax was constitutionally applied to the transactions. We agree with the district court and affirm upon its well reasoned opinion. United States and Hercules Incorporated v. Forst, 442 F.Supp. 920 (W.D.Va.1977).

3

AFFIRMED.