Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Werner v. United States

Werner v. United States, 512 F.2d 1381 (2d Cir. 1975)

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1975-04-11
Topic
employee-benefits-and-executive-compensation

How later courts describe this case

  • holding defendant liable for withholding taxes even though defendant was not an officer, shareholder or director

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Werner v. United States. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
5 opinions
WERNER v. UNITED STATES,512 F.2d 1381(2nd Cir. 1975)
HOWARD M. WERNER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
DEFENDANT AND THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. HUGO BUA ET AL.,
THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS.
No. 731, Docket 74-2166.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Argued March 3, 1975.
Decided April 11, 1975.
Louis Noah Forman, New York City (Joseph Neiman, Newington, Conn., of counsel), for plaintiff-appellant.

Jeffrey S. Blum, Washington, D.C. (Scott P. Crampton, Asst. Atty. Gen., Gilbert E. Andrews, Michael L. Paup and Jeffrey S. Blum, Tax Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., on the brief, PeterPage 1382C. Dorsey, U.S. Atty. for the District of Connecticut, and Henry S. Cohn, Asst. U.S. Atty., of counsel), for defendant and third-party plaintiff-appellee.
Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, M. Joseph Blumenfeld, Judge, holding appellant responsible for unpaid taxes withheld from the wages of employees of Hugo's Continental Restaurant, Inc.
Before FRIENDLY and FEINBERG, Circuit Judges, and BARTELS, District Judge.fn*
PER CURIAM:
[1] Howard M. Werner appeals from a judgment of the District Court for the District of Connecticut holding him responsible as a person in ultimate control of the corporation under26 U.S.C. § 6672for taxes withheld from the wages of employees of Hugo's Continental Restaurant, Inc. for the third and fourth quarters in 1967. We affirm on the basis of the opinion below, reported at 374 F.Supp. 558 (D.Conn., 1974), and upon the additional authority of Adams v. United States,504 F.2d 73(7th Cir., 1974); Mueller v. Nixon,470 F.2d 1348(6th Cir., 1972), cert. denied,412 U.S. 949, 93 S.Ct. 3011, 37 L.Ed.2d 1001 (1973); Pacific National Insurance Co. v. United States,422 F.2d 26(9th Cir.), cert. denied,398 U.S. 937, 90 S.Ct. 1838, 26 L.Ed.2d 269 (1970).Page 33
  1. Of the Eastern District of New York, sitting by designation. ↩