Volume 290 — United States Reports

Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111 (1933), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court on the difference between business and personal expenses and the difference between ordinary business deductions and capital expenses. It is one of the most important income tax law cases.

Held: treating the settlement as an overpayment of the charter freight, that the cause was one of affreightment and that a lien attached to the vessel for the amount of the overpayment. It was argued to us, as it has been in other cases, that, as the payment for excess' freight was made under mistake, the demand is upon a cause of action for money had and received, which lies only at common law and not in admiralty.

Held: also, that although the' carrier joined in through passenger rates with railroads under Federal control, fit was not within this phrase, because there was not such a connection as would permit the regular and general transfer of freight.

Held: that the provision of the decree of the Georgia court directing the payment to R. D. Blowers, trustee, of *209 $1,750 to be “ expended by him in his discretion for the benefit of the minor child, including her education, support, maintenance, medical attention and other necessary items of expenditure ” was not intended to ^relieve the father from all further liability to support Sadie.

Held: originating in one treaty, was continued without change of substance in the other. See Abie State Bank v. Bryan, 282 U.S. 765 , 781.

Held: after a full review of the authorities, that the underwriters were discharged by force of the breach of warranty at the inception of the voyage. 4 The distinction is apparent between suits such as this where the unseaworthiness of a vessel is merely a condition of exemption and suits where the unseaworthiness of a vessel is the basis of a suit for damages.

Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell, 290 U.S. 398 (1934), also called the Minnesota Mortgage Moratorium Case, was a decision of the United States Supreme Court holding that Minnesota's suspension of creditors' remedies was not in violation of the Contract Clause of the United States Constitution. Blaisdell was decided during the depth of the Great Depression and has been criticized by modern conservative and libertarian commentators.

Burroughs v. United States, 290 U.S. 534 (1934), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld as constitutional the financial disclosure and reporting requirements of the Federal Corrupt Practices Act. The court also held that certain counts incorporated by description in other counts of an indictment may be considered in determining the adequacy of the original certain counts.