Legal Opinion

Alexander & Garrett v. United States

District Court, S.D. Georgia

Decided July 26, 1927PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BARRETT, District Judge.

By appropriate stipulation between counsel for the parties, this case is for determination as to the facts as well as the law by the court alone.

■ There are only two questions for answer in the ease: (1) Was the plaintiff taxable for the year 1917 under section 209 of the Revenue Act of 1917 or under section 201 (Comp. St. §§ 6336%j, 6336%b) ? and (2) Was the plaintiff in the years 1918, 1919, 1920, and 1921 taxable as a personal service corporation ?

The plaintiff was a corporation during all the years in. question, with a capital stock of $75,000, styled during 1917…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Hubbard-Ragsdale Co. v. DeanDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1926
  2. Cartier v. DoyleCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1921
  3. Empire Fuel Co. v. HaysDistrict Court, N.D. West Virginia · 1924
  4. Park Amusement Co. v. McCaughnDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1925
  5. Porter v. LedererDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1920

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Miller v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1969
  2. Fuller & Smith v. RoutzahnDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1927
  3. Meinrath Brokerage Co. v. CrooksDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1928
  4. (PS) Robinson v. Carmax Auto Finance, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2025
  5. Miller v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1969

1 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