Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

194 F.2d 536

Docket No. 10979.

Commissioner v. Smith

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Feb. 12, 1952.

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1952-02-12

Cited by 3 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1953

2 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Applies 26 U.S.C. § 1111

Relies on Commissioner v. Wilcox · Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Gooch Milling & Elevator Co · Moran Transportation Corp. v. Administratrix of Mellino

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1952-02-12

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Theron L. Caudle, Charles Oliphant, John M. Morawski, Ellis N. Slack, A. F. Prescott and Graham Loving, Jr., all of Washington, D. C., for petitioner.

¶2Sol Goodman, Cincinnati, Ohio, for respondent.

¶3Before ALLEN, MARTIN and McALLISTER, Circuit Judges.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5This case came on to be heard on the record and briefs and oral argument of counsel.

¶6And it appearing that the Tax Court of the United States, in a prior proceeding, held the respondent liable in equity as a transferee for unpaid taxes of a corporation, and that the decision of the Tax Court, 11 T.C. 174, was affirmed by this court in Charles E. Smith & Sons Co. v. Commissioner, 6 Cir., 184 F.2d 1011, certiorari denied 340 U.S. 953, 954, 71 S.Ct. 572, 95 L.Ed. 687.

¶7And it appearing that the receipt of the excessive salary to the extent of which the respondent was held liable as transferee constituted “the bare receipt of property or money wholly belonging to another”, Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Wilcox, 327 U.S. 404, 66 S.Ct. 546, 549, 90 L.Ed. 752, and that the respondent held the funds not for himself but for the creditors of the transferor;

¶8It is ordered that the decision of the Tax Court be, and it hereby is, affirmed.

/194/f2d/536 · .json · Public domain