Supreme Court of the United States, 1931

Roy & Titcomb, Inc. v. United States

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided January 26, 1931

282 U.S. 811; 75 L. Ed. 727; 51 S. Ct. 197; 1931 U.S. LEXIS 930; 9 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 969 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Mr. Sidney P. Simpson, with whom Messrs. A. C. Rearick and Theodore B. Benson were on the brief, for petitioner. Assistant Attorney General Rugg, with whom Solicitor General Thacher and: Messrs. Claude R. Branch, Special Assistant to the Attorney General, Lisle A. Smith, Bradley B. Gilman, and Erwin N. Griswold were on the brief, for the United States.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Charlton Woolen Co. v. White (District Court, D. Massachusetts 1939)

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

Per Curiam:

Judgment affirmed.-,.,) (1) Stange v. United States, ante, p. 270; Aiken, Administratrix, v. Burnet, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, ante, p. 277; W. P. Brown & Sons Lumber Company v. Burnet, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, ante, p. 283; Burnet, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, v. Chicago Railway Equipment Co., ante, p. 295. (2) Graham v. Goodcell, ante, p. 409; Mascot Oil Com*812pany, Inc., v. United States ante, p. 434.

Mr. Sidney P. Simpson, with whom Messrs. A. C. Rearick and Theodore B. Benson were on the brief, for petitioner. Assistant Attorney General Rugg, with whom Solicitor General Thacher and: Messrs. Claude R. Branch, Special Assistant to the Attorney General, Lisle A. Smith, Bradley B. Gilman, and Erwin N. Griswold were on the brief, for the United States.

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