Legal Opinion
Joseph R. Dileo, Mary A. Dileo, Walter E. Mycek, Jr., Michele A. Mycek and Arcelo Reproduction Company, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided March 20, 1992No. 849, Docket 91-4178PublishedCited by 294 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FEINBERG, Circuit Judge:
Joseph R. DiLeo, Mary A. DiLeo, Walter E. Mycek, Jr., Michele A. Mycek and Arcelo Reproduction Company, Inc. (the taxpayers) appeal from judgments of the United States Tax Court, Arthur L. Nims, C.J., dated September 5, 1991, determining that they were liable for deficiencies in their federal income taxes. This appeal also raises issues preserved for appeal following a proceeding in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Vincent L. Broderick, J., involving the same parties. The principal issue before us is whether certain documents,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- John Doe Agency v. John Doe Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- United States v. Sells Engineering, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- United States v. Interstate Dress Carriers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1960
- United States v. John Doe, Inc. ISupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- In re Special March 1981 Grand JuryCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by294 opinions
- Clayton v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1994
- Rhone-Poulenc Surfactants & Specialties, L.P. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 2000
- Krause v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1992
- King's Court Mobile Home Park, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1992
- In Re Special Grand Jury 89-2Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2006
289 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.