Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

287 U.S. 314

Strother v. Burnet

Supreme Court of the United States

Argued November 18, 1932.

Decided December 5, 1932.

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1932-12-05

2 counsel of record

Relies on Bankers Pocahontas Coal Co. v. Burnet · Strother v. Commissioner · Bankers Pocahontas Coal Co. v. Commissioner

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · 9–0 · Decided 1932-12-05

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions (12 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2016 · most notably United States v. Ron Pair Enterprises, Inc. (1989), Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission (1969)

17 federal appellate · 5 district · 7 state decisions

180193219401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 →

¶1Mr. Camden R. McAtee, with whom Mr. Wells Goodykoonts was on the brief, for petitioner.

¶2Assistant Attorney General Youngquist, with whom Solicitor General Thacher, and Messrs. Whitney North Seymour, Sewall Key, and Andrew D. Sharpe were on the brief, for respondent.

¶3Mr. Justice Stone

¶4delivered the opinion of the Court.

¶5The decision in this case, which is here on certiorari, turns on that in Bankers Pocahontas Coal Co. v. Burnet, just decided, ante, p. 308.

¶6Petitioner, a stockholder in the Bankers Pocahontas Coal Co., received dividends upon his stock which were, to some extent, a distribution of the royalty payments received by the corporation and involved in its suit against the Commissioner. The ruling of the Commissioner in this case, that the amounts so distributed from royalties were taxable income, was upheld by the Board of Tax Appeals, 18 B. T. A. 901, and by the Court of *315Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 55 F. (2d) 626, which remanded the case to the Board for further proceedings, to enable the petitioner to offer additional testimony having a bearing on the correct computation of the deficiency, in accordance with the opinion of the court. The parties stipulate that the decision of this case shall be controlled by that of Bankers Pocahontas Coal Co. v. Burnet, and the judgment below is accordingly

¶7Affirmed.

/287/us/314 · .json · Public domain