71 F.2d 1021 - United States v. Mellon — 71 F.2d 1021

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently March 1990

4 federal appellate · 2 district ·

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

¶1Wm. A. Gray, of Philadelphia, Pa., and Morris L. Marcus, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellants.

¶2William Watson Smith, of Pittsburgh, Pa., E. L. Batts, of Austin, Tex., and Leon E. Hickman and Smith, Buchanan, Scott & Gordon, all of Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellees.

¶3Before WOOLLEY, DAVIS, and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5These are qui tarn actions wherein the plaintiff, alleging fraud in the defendants’ income tax returns, seeks to recover for the United States and for himself statutory penalties and twiee the amount of the alleged unpaid taxes. The defendants interposed statutory demurrers, raising two questions:

¶6(a) Do the statutes of the United States authorize a qui tarn action to recover against one who has defrauded the United States by making a false income tax return; and

¶7(b) Under the statutes of the United States is it necessary to obtain the permission of the Commissioner of Internal Eevenue before commencing a qui tarn action of the character indicated?

¶8The District Court, finding against the plaintiff and against the United States, entered judgments for the defendants. These appeals followed. Por a statement of the cases, citation of statutes, and a full discussion of the law we refer to the opinion of the learned trial judge. 4 P. Supp. 947. As his opinion contains complete and correct answers to the questions involved, we adopt it as our own and accordingly affirm the judgments from which these appeals were taken.