U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1950

Psaty & Fuhrman, Inc. v. Stimson, Secretary of War

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided May 22, 1950 · Prettyman, Bazelon, Fahy

182 F.2d 985; 87 U.S. App. D.C. 47; 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 3732 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. David Morgulas, Washington, (D. C., submitted on the brief for petitioner., Mr. Harland F. Leathers, Attorney, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C., with whom Assistant Attorney General H. G. Morison and Mr. Newell A. Clapp, Attorney, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C., were on the brief, submitted on the brief, for respondents.

Cases that cite this one

14 later published cases cite this decision.

Brooks v. Laws (D.C. Cir. 1953)
Grannis & Sloan, Inc., and Contractors Machinery Company v. Renegotiation Board (4th Cir. 1961)
The Ebco Manufacturing Company v. Secretary Of Commerce (6th Cir. 1955)
Ebco Manufacturing Co. v. Secretary of Commerce (6th Cir. 1955)
United States v. Martin Wunderlich Co. (Two Cases) (D.C. Cir. 1954)
United States v. California Eastern Line, Inc. (D.C. Cir. 1954)
Newsom v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1954)
Theodore W. Keller and Dorothy L. Keller, Co-Partners Trading Under the Name of Howard Manufacturing Co. v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1953)
Bass v. Stimson (United States Tax Court 1953)
Keller v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1953)
Mason & Hanger-Silas Mason Co. v. United States (Court of Claims 1975)
Metallurgical, Inc. v. The Renegotiation Board (8th Cir. 1967)
United States v. California Eastern Line, Inc. (Supreme Court of the United States 1955)
United States v. Scandia Mfg. Co. (District Court, D. New Jersey 1952)

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

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, on March 16, 1942, entered into a contract with the Government for the construction of a hospital. The Secretary of War renegotiated the contract on a completed contract basis and, on February 7, 1944, made a unilateral determination that petitioner had excessive profits of $700,000. Petitioner applied to the Tax Court for a determination that the renegotiation of its contract must be upon a fiscal (which in this case was calendar) year basis. The Tax Court supported the Secretary.

It is now settled that a question such as the one here before us, being neither constitutional nor jurisdictional, is one which the Tax Court under the statute, 50 U.S.C. A.Appendix § 1191, has exclusive and final jurisdiction to determine. 1 .The petition must, therefore, he

Dismissed.

. Lichtor v. United States, 1948, 334 U.S. 742, 68 S.Ct. 1294, 92 L.Ed. 1694; Aircraft & Diesel Equipment Corp. v. Hirsch, 1947, 331 U.S. 752, 67 S.Ct. 1493, 91 L.Ed. 1796; Macauley v. Waterman S. S. Corp., 1946, 327 U.S. 540, 66 S.Ct. 712, 90 L.Ed. 839; Ring Const. Corporation v. Secretary of War of U. S., 1949, 85 U.S.App.D.C. 386, 178 F.2d 714, certiorari denied, 1950, 339 U.S. 943, 70 S. Ct. 796; Eastern Machinery Company v. Under Secretary of War, 1950, 86 U.S. App.D.C. —, 182 F.2d 99; Blanchard Mach. Co. v. Reconstruction Finance Corp., 1949, 85 U.S.App.D.C. 361, 177 F.2d 727, certiorari denied, 1950, 339 U.S, 912, 70 S.Ct. 571; U. S. Electrical Motors v. Jones, 1946, 80 U.S.App.D.C. 329, 153 F.2d 134.

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