Froehlinger v. United States

Second Circuit Court of Appeals

Argued Nov. 11, 1963. Decided April 20, 1964.

Second Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1964-04-20

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently June 1975

1 federal appellate · 1 district ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Duberstein D Stanton · Poyner v. Commissioner · 217 F. Supp. 13 - Froehlinger v. United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1964-04-20

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Joshua W. Miles and D. Sylvan Friedman, Baltimore, Md., for appellant.

Alec A. Pandaleon, Attorney, Department of Justice (Louis F. Oberdorfer, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lee A. Jackson and Harry Baum, Attorneys, Department of Justice, Joseph D. Tydings, U.S. Atty., and Robert W. Kernan, Asst. U.S. Atty., on brief), for appellee.

Before HAYNSWORTH, Circuit Judge, and BARKSDALE and CRAVEN, District Judges.

PER CURIAM.

¶1

It was for the district court to determine the ultimate issue of fact as to whether or not the payment was a gift or compensation. It found as a fact that the payment was compensation. Froehlinger v. United States, 217 F.Supp. 13 (D.C.Md.1963). That finding of ultimate fact is binding upon us. Commissioner v. Duberstein, 363 U.S. 278, 80 S.Ct. 1190, 4 L.Ed.2d 1218 (1960); Poyner v. C.I.R., 301 F.2d 287 (4th Cir. 1962).

¶2

Affirmed.