89 F.1d 1 - Crawford v. Hubbell — 89 F. 1

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently December 1937

3 federal appellate ·

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.

¶1Removal oe Causes— Federal Question — Constktjction op Revenue Act.

¶2A cause involving tlie question whether an express company or its customer must furnish the stamp required by the war revenue act of 1898 to be aifixed to a receipt given by the company is one arising under a law providing internal revenue, within Rev. St. § 629, and is removable.

¶3MoÍ ion to remand.

¶4Frederick Seymour, for the motion.

¶5Charles Steele, opposed.

¶6LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.

¶7An analysis of the bill of .complaint shows conclusively that the real controversy tendered is whether or not tlie terms of the recent war revenue act require express companies 1o pay for the stamps to be affixed to the receipts they give, and forbid their exacting the price of such stamps from their customers, or whelh<r such act leaves the question who shall pay for the revenue stamp open between the parties. Manifestly, then, this is a cause ‘Arising under [a] law providing internal revenue.” U. S. Rev. St. § 629. It has been held in this court that the application of the section last quoted has not been modified, as to removed causes, by the acts of 1887 aud 18S8. Vinal v. Improvement Co., 34 Fed. 228. Motion denied.