Case Name: PINE HILL CRYSTAL SPRING WATER CO. v. UNITED STATES
Court: United States Court of Claims
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1932-05-02
Citations: 58 F.2d 506
Docket Number: No. J-613
Parties: PINE HILL CRYSTAL SPRING WATER CO. v. UNITED STATES.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 58
Pages: 506–510

Head Matter:
PINE HILL CRYSTAL SPRING WATER CO. v. UNITED STATES.
No. J-613.
Court of Claims.
May 2, 1932.
Harry S. Hall, of New York City, for plaintiff.
Joseph H. Sheppard, of Washington, D. C., and Charles B. Rugg, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the United States.
Before BOOTH, Chief Justice, and GREEN, LITTLETON, WILLIAMS, and WHALEY, Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This case turns upon the question as to whether the plaintiff filed in time a proper claim for refund. Plaintiff contends that the letter of January 31, 1923 (finding 4), is a sufficient and legal refund claim. This issue was involved in the case of Philipsborn v. United States, 53 F. (2d) 133, 72 Ct. Cl. 545, and we think that the plaintiff's case comes within that decision. See, also, Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. v. United States, 260 U. S. 565, 43 S. Ct. 169, 67 L. Ed. 406.