Ruge v. Comm'r
United States Tax Court
Held, amounts received in 1951 and 1952 by petitioner Arthur C. Ruge, who in 1944 had transferred all right, title, and interest in certain patents, were received partly as proceeds from the sale of patents taxable as long-term capital gain under the provisions of section 117 and partly as compensation for personal services taxable as ordinary income under section 22 (a), Internal Revenue Code of 1939.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Keen, Judge:
The sole question before this Court is whether payments under an agreement between Baldwin and Ruge constituted ordinary income or capital gains. The petitioners claim that this agreement dated June 14,1944, was an agreement for the sale of inventions and patents only, and that all the amounts in question here were the payments in consideration of that sale and are taxable as long-term capital gains under section 117 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939. Edward C. Myers, 6 T. C. 258, and Commissioner v. Hopkinson, 126 F. 2d 406, are cited to us by the petitioners as…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Waterman v. MacKenzieSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Myers v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 1946
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. HopkinsonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1942
- Dreymann v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 1948
- Marco v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1955
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- Bell Intercontinental Corporation v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1967
- Wager v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1969
- Aagaard v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1971
- United States Mineral Products Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1969
- Joe L. Schmitt, Jr., and Helen N. Schmitt v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1959
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.