Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, 1948

Reynolds v. Chicago, St. P., M. & O. Ry. Co.

Reynolds v. Chicago, St. P., M. & O. Ry. Co.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Decided May 14, 1948 · Johnsen, Riddick, Sanborn
168 F.2d 943; 36 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1157; 1948 U.S. App. LEXIS 3891; 36 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 1157 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Abbott M. Sellers, Sp. Asst, to the Atty. Gen. (Theron Lamar Caudle, Asst. Atty. Gen., Miss Helen R. Carloss, Lee A. Jackson and Maurice P. Wolk, Sp. Assts. to the Atty. Gen., and Victor E. Anderson, U. S. Atty., and Linus J. Hammond, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of St. Paul, Minn., on the brief), for appellant., Nelson Trottman, of Chicago, 111. (Warren Newcome, of St. Paul, Minn., and Nye F. Morehouse and Lowell Hastings, both of Chicago, 111., on the brief), for appellee.

Reynolds v. Chicago, St. P., M. & O. Ry. Co.

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

JOHNSEN, Circuit Judge.

The Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis and Omaha Railway Company in 1944 was assessed employment taxes under the Carriers Taxing Act, 26 U.S.C.A.Int.Rev.Code, § 1500 et seq., 45 U.S.C.A. § 261 et seq., on the workers who had performed services in 1940 under an employment relationship with the Shipley Company which had contracted to perform such services for the Railway Co. On denial of its claim for refund, the Railway Co. sued in the District Court to recover the taxes so paid and obtained a judgment. See Chicago, St. P., M. & O. Ry. Co. v. Reynolds, D.C. Minn., 68 F.Supp. 499. The Collector has appealed.

The Shipley Co. had been in the business of furnishing various contract services to railroads since 1923, and appellee had begun its contract relations with the Shipley Co. during that year. In general, the contracts involved related to the placing of coal, in bins or chutes; coaling locomotives; storing ice; icing refrigerator cars; cleaning freight cars; unloading and reloading livestock for feed, water and rest; and handling and servicing heaters in refrigerator cars.

The situation in its material aspects is controlled by our opinion in Reynolds v. Northern Pacific Railway Co., 8 Cir., 168 F.2d 934, and we need not additionally discuss it.

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.