Legal Opinion · Dissent

Allen v. National Manufacture & Stores Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided January 28, 1942No. 9814Published

1DissentFoster, Circuit Judge

I agree that Regulation 94, Article 22 is valid when applied to cases coming under its provisions but I do not consider that the case at bar is at all governed by it. I do not entirely agree with the statement of facts in the majority opinion as certain important evidence is not referred to. Therefore, I will restate the facts as I find them.

Plaintiff is engaged in the business of selling merchandise on the installment plan and not in buying and selling stocks. In 1929 plaintiff adopted the policy of buying its stock when offered at less than market value for the purpose of retiring it. From…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. First Nat. Bank of Charlotte v. National Exchange Bank of BaltimoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  2. Schafer v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
  3. E. R. Squibb & Sons v. HelveringCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1938
  4. Johnson v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1932
  5. Union County Nat. Bank v. Ozan Lumber Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1910

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