Case Name: George E. BARTOL, Jr., George E. Bartol, III, and Central-Penn National Bank of Philadelphia, Executors of the Estate of Mary Rush Bartol, Deceased, Plaintiffs, v. Edgar A. McGINNES, Individually and as United States District Director of Internal Revenue for the Internal Revenue District of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Defendant
Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1961-05-17
Citations: 194 F. Supp. 82
Docket Number: Civ. A. No. 24596
Parties: George E. BARTOL, Jr., George E. Bartol, III, and Central-Penn National Bank of Philadelphia, Executors of the Estate of Mary Rush Bartol, Deceased, Plaintiffs, v. Edgar A. McGINNES, Individually and as United States District Director of Internal Revenue for the Internal Revenue District of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Defendant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Supplement
Volume: 194
Pages: 82–82

Head Matter:
George E. BARTOL, Jr., George E. Bartol, III, and Central-Penn National Bank of Philadelphia, Executors of the Estate of Mary Rush Bartol, Deceased, Plaintiffs, v. Edgar A. McGINNES, Individually and as United States District Director of Internal Revenue for the Internal Revenue District of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Defendant.
Civ. A. No. 24596.
United States District Court E. D. Pennsylvania.
May 17, 1961.
James J. Cloran, Lewis H. Van Dusen, Jr., Drinker, Biddle & Reath, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiffs.
Walter E. Alessandroni, U. S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa., for defendant.

Opinion:
GRIM, District Judge.
After the filing of the court's opinion, findings of fact and conclusions of law, the defendant filed a motion under F.R. Civ.P. 52(b), 28 U.S.C., requesting the court to supplement its opinion and findings by making three additional findings of fact.
After a careful rereading and analysis of the testimony in the case the court is of the opinion that the requested additional findings of fact should not be made for the reason that none of them is warranted by the evidence in the case.
Order
And now, May 17, 1961, defendant's request for additional findings of fact is refused.