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

United States v. A. S. Kreider Co.

• 1940 • 313 U.S. 443 • Hughes Court
In the United States v. A.S. Kreider Co., 1940, the Supreme Court examined whether a Pennsylvania corporation could be held liable for unpaid federal taxes owed by another company it had acquired assets from, even though no formal agreement or contract existed between them regarding tax liability. The court ruled in favor of the U.S government stating that under Section 311(a) of the Revenue Act of 1926 and Section 280(a)(1) of Revenue Act of 1929, when one corporation acquires substantially...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: 1940
Docket: 853
313 U.S. 443
61 S. Ct. 1007
85 L. Ed. 1447
1941 U.S. LEXIS 1301
Argued: May 07, 1941

United States v. A. S. Kreider Co.

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the United States v. A.S. Kreider Co., 1940, the Supreme Court examined whether a Pennsylvania corporation could be held liable for unpaid federal taxes owed by another company it had acquired assets from, even though no formal agreement or contract existed between them regarding tax liability. The court ruled in favor of the U.S government stating that under Section 311(a) of the Revenue Act of 1926 and Section 280(a)(1) of Revenue Act of 1929, when one corporation acquires substantially all properties and assets (including intangible goodwill) from another corporation through reorganization but does not formally assume its liabilities including tax debts, it is still responsible for those debts if they are related to business conducted with these properties before acquisition. This ruling established an important precedent about corporate responsibility for inherited tax liabilities after mergers or acquisitions.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

The dissenting opinion in the United States v. A.S. Kreider Co., 1940 case, argued that the majority's interpretation of Section 77B of the Bankruptcy Act was incorrect and overly broad. The dissenters believed that this section should not be applied to cases where a corporation had already been dissolved by state law before bankruptcy proceedings began, as it would undermine states' rights to regulate their own corporations. They also disagreed with the majority's view that federal courts could disregard state laws regarding corporate dissolution when applying Section 77B, arguing instead for a more limited reading of federal power under this statute.

Opinion written by Justice FMurphy
Decided: May 26, 1941
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