Legal Opinion
St. Clair v. United States
District Court, S.D. California
Decided May 15, 1950No. 9711PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
YANKWICH, District Judge.
The above-entitled cause, heretofore tried, argued and submitted, is now decided as follows:
Judgment will be for the defendant that plaintiff take nothing by the complaint. Costs to the defendant.
Comment
I am of the view that the Commissioner of Internal Revenue correctly interpreted St. Clair Estate Company in 1939 and 1940 as dividends taxable at ordinary rates, and not as partial distributions in liquidation.
The question is purely one of fact, to be determined from an examination of the unthe payments made to the plaintiff by the disputed record and facts in the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Letts v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1936
- Pacific Magnesium, Inc. v. WestoverDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1949
- Holmby Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Rev.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1936
- Tootle v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1932
- Jones v. DawsonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1945
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- L. P. St. Clair v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1951
- L. P. St. Clair v. United States of America, Annastatia St. Clair v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1951