C. M. Hall Lamp Co. v. United States
District Court, E.D. Michigan
1Opinion of the Court
KOSCINSKI, District Judge.
Plaintiff taxpayer seeks recovery of allegedly overpaid excess profits taxes for the year 1941. In its return for that year plaintiff included in its equity invested capital an item of $646,078.07, representing good will purchased from Edmund & Jones Corporation in 1926. Disallowance of this item by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue resulted in the present suit. Claim for the good will item has now been reduced by plaintiff to $525,478.77.
For purposes of brevity plaintiff will hereinafter be referred to as Hall and the Edmund & Jones Corporation as E & J.
Plaintiff…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Nachod & United States Signal Co. v. HelveringCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1934
- Motor Products Corp. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1942
- Landesman-Hirschheimer Co. v. Commissioner of Int. Rev.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1930
- Lewis A. Crossett Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1931
- City Bank Farmers Trust Co. v. HoeyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1942
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- San Antonio Savings Association and Subsidiaries v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1989
- TransPerfect Global, Inc. v. Lionbridge Technologies, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2021
- TransPerfect Global, Inc. v. Lionbridge Technologies, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2021