UNITED STATES
v.
GOGGIN
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The government is not entitled to interest on its tax claim after the date of adjudication.
The government and the Trustee stipulated to the facts of the case. The Referee and District Court, based on these stipulated facts, ruled on legal is…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Precedent (Stare Decisis) cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The government stipulated all the facts of this case in writing with the Trustee, who is appellee here. The Referee made findings which included the facts so established and no others. His order, based upon these findings of fact, concluded the major issues of law in favor of the government. However, there was a holding on the stipulated fact that the government was not entitled to interest on the tax claim after the date of adjudication. Upon a review of the order, the District Court held, based upon the same stipulated facts, that this interest was not recoverable, citing City of New York v. Saper, Trustee, 336 U.S. 328, 69 S.Ct. 554, 93 L.Ed. 710.
A motion has been made here by appellant to bring in certain documents claimed to have been part of the record in the bankruptcy case, which were not urged before the Referee, not referred to in the stipulation or the findings of fact or the Referee’s certificate upon review. The District Court did not have these documents before it when it affirmed the order of the Referee. The motion is denied. Heath v. Helmick, 9 Cir., 173 F. 2d 156. See Speer v. Rural Special School District No. 50, 8 Cir., 100 F. 2d 202, 206.
Based upon the original stipulation, as interpreted by the District Court, United States v. Sampsell, 9 Cir., 153 F. 2d 731, is not applicable here. The order denying interest to the government after adjudication is therefore affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Morton Briskin v. White, 296 F.2d 132 (9th Cir. 1961)
-
In re Gibraltor-Amusements Ltd., 315 F.2d 210 (2d Cir. 1963)
-
Fortner & Perrin, Inc. v. James A. A. Smith in Bankruptcy, 327 F.2d 801 (9th Cir. 1964)
Authorities Cited
- City of N.Y. v. Saper in Bankruptcy, 336 U.S. 328 (U.S. 1949)
- United States v. Sampsell, 153 F.2d 731 (9th Cir. 1946)
- Heath v. Helmick, 173 F.2d 157 (9th Cir. 1949)
- Speer v. Rural Special Sch. Dist. NO. 50 OF Norphlet, 100 F.2d 202 (8th Cir. 1938)