Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta John L. Whiting-J. J. Adams Co. v. Burrill 258 U.S. 39

← Cases

John L. Whiting-J. J. Adams Co. v. Burrill

258 U.S. 39 Court SCOTUS Decision date 1922-02-27 Docket No. 113 English

Judges Mr. Justice Pitney, being absent, took no part in the decision.

Delivered by Holmes J.

Contents

Majority — Holmes J.

p. 39
JOHN L. WHITING—J. J. ADAMS COMPANY v. BURRILL, TREASURER AND RECEIVER-GENERAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS.

Syllabus

ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS.
No. 113.
Argued January 26, 1922.
Decided February 27, 1922.
Decided upon the authority of Burrill v. Locomobile Co., ante, 34. Affirmed.
Mr. Charles L. Favinger, with whom Mr. Edward E. Blodgett and Mr. William P. Everts were on the brief, for plaintiff in error.
Mr. Wm. Harold Hitchcock for defendant in error.

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a suit like the two just decided, ante, 34, .to recover .taxes paid under the Act of 1909 there mentioned and St. 1918, c. 253. In this case as in the other the statutes provided a remedy that excluded an action against the Treasurer at common law. St. 1909, c. 490, Pt. 111, § 70. St. 1918, c. 253, § 4. St. 1918, c. 255, § 7. . The District Court gave judgment for the defendant on the merits. Without going into them it follows that the judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed,

Mr. Justice Pitney, being absent, took no part in the decision.