United States v. R. F. Ball Construction Co.

U.S.

Court: Supreme Court of the United States

Citations: 355 U.S. 587, 2 L. Ed. 2d 510, 78 S. Ct. 442, 1 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1005, 1958 U.S. LEXIS 1856, SCDB 1957-058

Decision Date: 3/3/1958

Docket Number: No. 97

Jurisdiction: U.S.

Bluebook Citation: United States v. R. F. Ball Construction Co., 355 U.S. 587, 2 L. Ed. 2d 510, 78 S. Ct. 442, 1 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1005, 1958 U.S. LEXIS 1856, SCDB 1957-058 (1958)

More Cases: U.S. decisions from 1958

Citation analytics

How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

★Highly CitedTop 1% most-cited · cited by 134 decisions

134

Citing decisions

Authorities cited

Courts citing

Citations by decade

1950s1960s1970s1980s1990s2000s2010s2020s

Courts citing this case

5th Cir.9

S.D.N.Y.7

T.C.7

Tax Ct.6

10th Cir.5

7th Cir.5

Most recently cited by10

2023Barrett Daffin Frappier Teder & Weiss, LLP v. Chu N.D. Cal.
2016Exelon Corporation and Subsidiaries, Petitioner T.C.
2016Exelon Corp. v. Comm'r Tax Ct.
2013Estate of Kite v. Comm'r Tax Ct.
2013Estate of Virginia V. Kite, Donor, Deceased, Bank Of Oklahoma, N.A., Executor/Trustee, Petitioners T.C.
2013The Manufacturers Investment Corporation and Subsidiaries, as Successor in Interest to John Hancock Financial Services, Inc. and Subsidiaries; including John Hancock Life Insurance Company (U.S.A.) as Successor in Interest to John Hancock Life Insurance Company (f/k/a John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceCompany), Petitioner T.C.
2013John Hancock Life Insurance Company (U.S.A.) and Subsidiaries, as successor to John Hancock Life Insurance Company (f/k/a John Hancock Mutual LifeInsurance Company) and Subsidiaries, Petitioner T.C.
2013John Hancock Life Insurance Company (U.S.A.), as Successor in Interest to John Hancock Life Insurance Company; f.k.a. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company and Subsidiaries, Petitioners T.C.
2013John Hancock Life Insurance v. Commissioner T.C.
2013John Hancock Life Insurance Company (U.S.A.), as Successor in Interest to John Hancock Life Insurance Company v. Commissioner Tax Ct.

Cites 3 cases

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.

Opinion

UNITED STATES v. R. F. BALL CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., et al.

Judges

with whom Mr. Justice Douglas, Mr. Justice Burton and Mr. Justice Harlan join,

Attorneys

Alexander F. Prescott argued the cause for the United States. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Rice and George F. Lynch.
Josh H. Groce argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief was Jack Hebdon for the United Pacific Insurance Co., respondent. Mr. Groce also filed a brief for the R. F. Ball Construction Co., Inc., respondent.

majority Per Curiam.

The judgment is reversed. The instrument involved being inchoate and unperfected, the provisions of § 3672 (a), Revenue Act of 1939, 53 Stat. 449, as amended, 53 Stat. 882, 56 Stat. 957, do not apply. See United States v. Security Trust & Savings Bank, 340 U. S. 47; United States v. City of New Britain, 347 U. S. 81, 86-87. The claim of the interpleader for its costs is controlled by United States v. Liverpool & London & Globe Ins. Co., 348 U. S. 215.