Legal Opinion

Emma R. Dorl v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided November 13, 1974No. 132, Docket 74-1716PublishedCited by 124 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellant’s 1969 income tax return was submitted with a mathematical error which, with interest and penalty, resulted in a deficiency of $116.32. Appellant was notified of this by letter dated April 8, 1971, and paid this amount on April 13, 1971. Subsequently, the appellant’s 1969 return was selected for audit, and a further deficiency of $182.-84 was discovered.

Appellant, pro se, claims that the letter of April 8, 1971, written by a revenue officer, informing her that if she paid the original deficiency of $116.-32 she would have “paid in full for the Income Tax Return . . . for the period…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Phillips v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. Wickwire v. ReineckeSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
  3. Dorl v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1972
  4. Bornstein v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1965
  5. Elbert v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by124 opinions

  1. Rowlee v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1983
  2. Naftel v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1985
  3. Abrams v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1984
  4. Bollow v. Federal Reserve Bank of San FranciscoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
  5. Kluger v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1984

119 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API