Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Escher, Ancillary Administrator, Et Al. v. Woods, Treasurer Of The United States, Et Al.

• 1929 • 281 U.S. 379 • Hughes Court
The Escher v. Woods case in 1929 revolved around the issue of whether or not a tax refund claim could be filed by an estate administrator after the death of a taxpayer, and if such claims were subject to statutes of limitations. The Supreme Court ruled that administrators can indeed file for refunds on behalf of deceased taxpayers, but these claims are still subject to time limits as outlined by law. In this particular case, it was determined that the claim had been filed too late and thus...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Hughes Court
Term: 1929
Docket: 365
281 U.S. 379
50 S. Ct. 337
74 L. Ed. 918
1930 U.S. LEXIS 393
Argued: Apr 17, 1930

Escher, Ancillary Administrator, Et Al. v. Woods, Treasurer Of The United States, Et Al.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

The Escher v. Woods case in 1929 revolved around the issue of whether or not a tax refund claim could be filed by an estate administrator after the death of a taxpayer, and if such claims were subject to statutes of limitations. The Supreme Court ruled that administrators can indeed file for refunds on behalf of deceased taxpayers, but these claims are still subject to time limits as outlined by law. In this particular case, it was determined that the claim had been filed too late and thus could not be considered valid. This decision clarified how laws regarding tax refunds apply in situations where the original taxpayer has passed away before filing their own claim.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Escher, Ancillary Administrator, et al. v. Woods, Treasurer of the United States, et al., Justice Stone argued that a tax refund claim should not be barred by statute of limitations if it was filed within two years after payment and before five years from filing return. He believed that this interpretation would align with Congress' intent when they enacted the Revenue Act of 1921 which provided taxpayers with an extended period to file claims in certain circumstances such as fraud or mistake in calculation. The majority's decision to bar the claim based on a strict reading of statutory language disregarded these special provisions and unfairly penalized taxpayers who acted diligently but were unable to meet rigid deadlines due to factors beyond their control.

Opinion written by Justice OWHolmes
Decided: Apr 28, 1930
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms