Washington Board of Trade v. McLaughlin
Washington Board of Trade v. McLaughlin
Opinion of the Court
This suit was brought in the District Court by various employers within the District of Columbia (1) to declare invalid an agreement made between the District of Columbia Unemployment Compensation Board and the Secretary of Labor pursuant to the Temporary Unemployment Compensation Act of 1958,
The employers’ central grievance is that they may, commencing in 1963, incur a tax liability as a result of payments made pursuant to the allegedly invalid agreement between the Secretary and the District Unemployment Compensation Board. The District Court dismissed the complaint.
Although appellees have advanced a number of arguments to sustain the judgment below, we need consider only one threshold issue dispositive of the case, namely, that any suit at this time is premature. It is not at all certain that the tax will ever be assessed against appellants. And if it should be, an adequate remedy at law will then be available to those who have standing to invoke it. See, e. g., Eecles v. Peoples Bank, 1948, 333 U.S. 426, 68 S.Ct. 641, 92 L.Ed. 784; State of California v. Latimer, 1938, 305 U.S. 255, 59 S.Ct. 166, 83 L.Ed. 159.
Affirmed.
. 72 Stat. 171 (1958), 42 U.S.C.A. § 1400 et seq.
. Int.Rev.Code of 1954, §§ 3301-08, 26 U.S.C.A. §§ 3301-3308.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- WASHINGTON BOARD OF TRADE, Eckington Building Supply Co., Monaghan-Randels, Inc., Cafe Burgundy, Inc., Robert R. Swarthout v. Robert E. McLAUGHLIN, David B. Karrick, Col. A. C. Welling, Clement F. Preller, and Thomas W. Brahany, As Members of the District of Columbia Unemployment Compensation Board, and James P. Mitchell, Secretary of Labor
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published