Case Name: NASH-BREYER MOTOR CO., Formerly Troy Motor Sales Co., Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1930-06-09
Citations: 42 F.2d 192
Docket Number: No. 251
Parties: NASH-BREYER MOTOR CO., Formerly Troy Motor Sales Co., Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 42
Pages: 192–192

Head Matter:
NASH-BREYER MOTOR CO., Formerly Troy Motor Sales Co., Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.
No. 251.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
June 9, 1930.
Arthur H. Deibert and Theodore B. Benson, both of Washington, D. C., for petitioner.
G. A. Youngquist, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Sewall Key and John Vaughan Groner, Sp. Asst. Attys. Gen. (C. M. Charest, Gen. Counsel, Bureau of Internal Revenue, and R. N. Shaw, Sp. Atty., Bureau of Internal Revenue, both of Washington, D. C., of counsel), for respondent.
Before L. HAND, AUGUSTUS N. HAND, and CHASE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This petition must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction for the reasons given in Massachusetts Eire & Marine Insurance Co. v. Commissioner, 42 F.(2d) 189, handed down herewith. The facts are the same, except that the petitioner is a Delaware corporation, which filed its return in California. The ease is a more striking illustration of the possible consequences. We should have to find very solid reasons for supposing that Congress intended to impose upon us at the will of the parties a controversy which for obvious reasons properly belongs either in the Ninth circuit, or in the District of Columbia. We may repeat here as well, however, that in fact the petitioner has suffered nothing from dismissal.
Petition dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.