ROEBLING v. STURGESS, Internal Revenue Collector; CADWALADER et al. v. SAME

ROEBLING v. STURGESS, Internal Revenue Collector. CADWALADER et al. v. SAME. (District Court, D. New Jersey. June 19, 1923.) Internal revenue <S=»28 — Remedy for illegal assessment held by action to recover taxes paid, and not by injunction to restrain collection. Though the internal revenue collector has acted, outside the scope of his authority in assessing taxes, complainants have an adequate remedy at law by an action to recover taxes illegally paid, under Act Nov. 23,1921, § 252, as amended by Act March 4, 1923, § 1, and Rev. St. § 3226, as amended by Act March 4, 1923, § 2, and equitable bills to restrain collection of additional taxes will not lie. <§=»For other cases see same topic a KEY-NUMBEK in all K.ey-Numbered Digests & Indexes In Equity. Separate bills for an injunction to restrain collection of additional taxes, by Ferdinand W. Roebling, Jr., and by Emily R. Cadwalader and another, as executors of the estate of Charles G. Roebling, deceased, against Edward L. Sturgess, individually and as Collector of the United States Internal Revenue, etc. On motions to dismiss. Bills dismissed. Charles P. Hutchinson, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Trenton, N. J., for the motion. Herbert Noble, of New York City, and Scott Scammell, of Trenton, N. J., opposed. [MAJORITY — BODINE, District Judge.] BODINE, District Judge. The bills in the above-entitled matters will be dismissed. Such actions are barred by section 3224 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (Comp. St. § 5947). Assuming, however, that there is anything in the contention of the complainants that the collector has acted outside the scope of his authority in assessing the taxes in question, as was stated by Mr. Chief Justice Taft in Graham v. Du Pont, 262 U. S. 234, 43 Sup. Ct. 567, 67 L. Ed. -, May 21, 1923: “It is certain that by tbe amendments to section 252 and section 3226, Rev. Stats., by the Act of March 4,1923, c. 276, 42 Stat. 1504 (Public No. 527), the complainant is given the right now to pay the tax, and sue to recover it back.” Since the .complainants have an adequate remedy at law, the bill's in equity will not lie.