McClellan v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
A partner withdrew from a partnership by agreement, though he had not given the notice provided in the articles of copartnership.
Read the full summary
A partner withdrew from a partnership by agreement, though he had not given the notice provided in the articles of copartnership. He received in cash an amount equal to his original capital contribution, increased by his share of the profits during the term of the partnership and diminished by his withdrawals and by losses entailed in the diminution of the value of stock exchange seats and real estate, as reflected in a reserve set up on the partnership books for such assets. The net result being less than the original capital contribution, the difference was claimed by the petitioner as…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Disney :
The Commissioner proposed a deficiency in income tax oí $4,346.10 against petitioners for the taxable year ended December 31, 1934. The petitioners allege the Commissioner erred in determining that the loss sustained by George R. McClellan in 1934, when he withdrew as a partner in Parrish & Co. and the partnership discharged its obligation to him as a withdrawing partner, was a capital *125loss limited to $2,000 rather than an ordinary loss. Other errors assigned were abandoned.
The major portion of the facts was stipulated. Inasmuch as we hereinafter set forth an epitome of all…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bull v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
3Cited by5 opinions
- McClellan v. Commissioner of Internal Rev.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1941
- Pollack v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1977
- Pacific Fin. Corp. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1953
- McClellan v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1940
- Pollack v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1977