E. Norman Peterson Marital Trust, Chemical Bank, Trustee v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
CALABRESI, Circuit Judge:
Language does not have a “plain meaning” outside of its particular context. “You should have passed, dummy,” means something entirely different at a bridge table from what it means on Superbowl Sunday. The same words signify very different things because the linguistic context has changed. In this case, the taxpayer has asked us to invalidate a Treasury regulation that defines the word “added” in a way that is consistent with half a century of tax law. The taxpayer asserts that the plain meaning of the word cannot support the definition given to it in the Treasury’s…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Helvering v. WinmillSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- United States v. Vogel Fertilizer Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Zicherman Ex Rel. Estate of Kole v. Korean Air Lines Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Lecroy Research Systems Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1984
- Samuels, Kramer & Company v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1991
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by120 opinions
- Miller v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 2000
- Elizabeth N. Callaway v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000
- Roman v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2004
- Rock of Ages Corporation v. Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, and Federal Mine Safety and Health Review CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
- Nick Kikalos and Helen Kikalos v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1999
115 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.