Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

201 F.2d 171

Docket No. 11569.

Gordon's Estate v. Commissioner

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1952-12-05

2 counsel of record

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“Contract to Lease with Privilege of Purchase”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Commissioner v. Dill Co.

Relies on Gilken Corp. v. Commissioner

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1952-12-05

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently February 1997

11 federal appellate ·

10019521960197019801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Timothy S. Hogan, Cincinnati, Ohio, for petitioner.

Charles S. Lyon, Ellis N. Slack, Mason B. Leming, Lyman G. Friedman, and L. W. Post, Washington, D.C., for respondent.

Before SIMONS, Chief Judge, and MARTIN and McALLISTER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

¶1

This petition for review of the decision of the Tax Court of the United States, upholding a determination of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue of a deficiency in the income tax of the petitioner's decedent for the year 1946, has been duly considered on the record and on the oral arguments and briefs of the contending attorneys:

¶2

From all of which it appears that, for the reasons stated in the opinion of the United States Tax Judge reviewed by the Tax Court of the United States and upon the authority of the opinion of this court in Gilken Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 6 Cir., 176 F.2d 141, 144, 145, and cases there cited, the Tax Court correctly held that, in accordance with a contract to lease with privilege of purchase of certain property owned by petitioner's decedent, the sum of $25,000 was received by decedent under a claim of right with no provision for its repayment and no restriction as to its use, and such amount was includible in the taxable income of petitioner's decedent for the year in which she received it;

¶3

The decision of the Tax Court is accordingly affirmed.

/201/f2d/171 · .json · Public domain