Legal Opinion
Smith v. United States
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided March 20, 1961No. Civ. A. No. 139-59PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEANEY, District Judge.
In 1951 and 1952 plaintiff Harry B. Smith (taxpayer) received certain sums as royalties for the exclusive license of patents owned by him and another. In accordance with the rulings of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue he reported these sums as ordinary income on his income tax returns for those years. On July 15, 1958, taxpayer filed claims for refund directed to those years, on the ground that these royalties were properly reportable as long-term capital gain. This change of position was prompted by the 1956 amendment to the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, adding…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- United States v. Borden Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Myers v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 1946
- Barnett Hollander, of the Will of Lester Field, Deceased v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1957
- Kenneth J. Tobin and Marguerite R. Tobin v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1959
- Aaron Zacks and Florence Zacks v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1960
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Anton Lorenz and Irene Lorenz v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1961
- Harry B. Smith and Mary L. Smith v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1962