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

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.

Chat with this case using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this case, check whether it is still good law, and see every case that cites it. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.