Legal Opinion
Bert Crosswhite and Virginia Crosswhite v. The United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided December 16, 1966No. 19-64PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DEFENDANT’S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
COWEN, Chief Judge.
On the basis of stipulated facts, both parties have filed motions for summary judgment in this action to recover income taxes paid by plaintiffs. The taxpayers, husband and wife, urge that gains from the sale of various parcels of real estate should be accorded capital gains treatment. The defendant would have us hold that the facts bring the case within the exclusionary language of Section 1221(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (26 U.S.C. § 1221(1), 1958 ed.); that the land…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Corn Products Refining Co. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Malat v. RiddellSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Galena Oaks Corporation v. Frank Scofield, Collector of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1954
- Arthur W. Smith and Mrs. Arthur W. Smith v. Charles H. Dunn, Formerly Acting Collector of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1955
- Fritz Thompson and Dora M. Thompson v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1963
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Goodman v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1968
- Crosswhite v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1977
- Huey v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1974
- Chilton T.C. Au v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1984
- Goodman v. United States.United States Court of Claims · 1968