From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fiori v. Rothensies

Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Oct 26, 1938
99 F.2d 922 (3d Cir. 1938)

Summary

discussing prima facie value of tax authority's claim, but failing to discuss burden of proof

Summary of this case from Raleigh v. Illinois Dept. of Revenue

Opinion

No. 6648.

October 26, 1938.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania; George A. Welsh, Judge.

Proceeding in the matter of Joseph Ciccone, bankrupt, wherein Walter Rothensies, Collector of Internal Revenue, filed proof of debt for income tax and claimed priority, and wherein John Fiori, creditor, filed objections. From a decree allowing the claim, John Fiori appeals.

Affirmed.

Irving I. Spector, of Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant.

J. Cullen Ganey, U.S. Atty., of Bethlehem, Pa., and Thomas J. Curtin, of Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee.

Before THOMPSON and BIGGS, Circuit Judges, and MARIS, District Judge.


This is an appeal from a decree of the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The appellant is a creditor in the bankrupt estate of Joseph Ciccone. The appellee, Collector of Internal Revenue, had filed proof of debt in the bankruptcy proceedings for income tax amounting to $1,127.54 and claimed priority for this amount. Before the referee the Collector introduced a proof of debt, an assessment which had been made, and assessment lists certified by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. An Internal Revenue agent testified from the Department's records that the tax was for a deficiency assessed in 1933 for the year 1930. The appellee also introduced in evidence Form No. 870 signed by the bankrupt consenting to the assessment. The agent who made the assessment was dead and the bankrupt's books containing the 1930 records were missing, so that the appellee was unable to produce the evidence upon which the assessment was made. The referee allowed the claim and was sustained by the District Court.

We think that proof of the assessment list with the accompanying certificate of the Commissioner was sufficient to establish a prima facie case that the tax assessed was due. United States v. Rindskopf, 105 U.S. 418, 26 L.Ed. 1131; Western Express Co. v. United States, 8 Cir., 141 F. 28. The appellant not only failed to overcome this prima facie case but in fact presented evidence which had the effect of supporting the government's claim.

The decree is affirmed.


Summaries of

Fiori v. Rothensies

Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Oct 26, 1938
99 F.2d 922 (3d Cir. 1938)

discussing prima facie value of tax authority's claim, but failing to discuss burden of proof

Summary of this case from Raleigh v. Illinois Dept. of Revenue
Case details for

Fiori v. Rothensies

Case Details

Full title:FIORI v. ROTHENSIES, Collector of Internal Revenue. In re CICCONE

Court:Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: Oct 26, 1938

Citations

99 F.2d 922 (3d Cir. 1938)

Citing Cases

United States v. Strebler

Appellee in the case at bar "not only failed to overcome the prima facie case made by the Government's…

United States v. Fidelity Casualty Co.

Thus, the plaintiff would make out a prima facie case which it would be the defendant's burden to overcome by…