Hoyt v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
FRANK, Circuit Judge.
Whatever our own independent opinion might be, we cannot disturb a factual inference made by the Tax Court unless it is unreasonable. Accordingly we must here accept the Tax Court’s finding which, in effect, is that the taxpayer, when she executed the guaranty, had no intention of ever asserting a claim against her daughter should taxpayer be compelled to pay the broker under the guaranty. For we cannót say that such a finding as to taxpayer’s intention cannot reasonably be inferred from these facts: The taxpayer knew that the probability was that her daughter could not…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Shiman v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1932
- American Cigar Co. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
- New York Trust Co. v. Island Oil & Transport CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- WF Young, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1941
3Cited by24 opinions
- National Carbide Corp. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Benjamin D. And Madeline Prentice Gilbert v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1957
- Arrigoni v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1980
- Roussel v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1961
- O. D. Bratton v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1954
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.