Strickland v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1. The determination in D. F. Strickland,16 B.T.A. 419, that Strickland was an employee of a political subdivision of the State of Texas, and that the compensation received by him from the Hidalgo County Water Improvement District No. Two was exempt from taxation is not res judicata of this proceeding. 2. Fees, as receiver, under appointment by Seventy-ninth Judicial District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, are not exempt from taxation.
1Opinion of the Court
*808OPINION.
Moeris :
The first question for determination upon the merits is the respondent’s refusal to exempt the compensation received under contracts with the Hidalgo County Water Improvement District No. Two. Respecting this issue the petitioner pleads a former proceeding before this Board between the same parties, D. F. Strickland, and Olive B. Strickland, 16 B. T. A. 419, involving the same question for the calendar years 1923 to 1926, inclusive, in which it was finally determined that such compensation was not subject to tax and, therefore, since said decision was not appealed the same has…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Tait v. Western Maryland Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1933
3Cited by1 opinion
- Strickland v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1935