Legal Opinion
Hobson v. District of Columbia
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided December 5, 1996No. 94-TX-1646PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SCHWELB, Associate Judge:
The District of Columbia Department of Finance and Revenue (DFR) determined that appellants Everett K. Hobson and Nora E. Hobson, who are husband and wife, were not legally entitled to certain deductions for “passive activity losses” which they had claimed on their 1989 and 1990 District of Columbia income tax returns. The Hobsons sought review in the Superior Court, but that court granted summary judgment in favor of the District with respect to both years. On appeal to this court, the Hobsons contend that the District did not “assess” the amount claimed to be due…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Bailey v. GloverSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Ehrenhaft v. Malcolm Price, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1984
- District of Columbia v. Sierra ClubDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- Chase v. District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control BoardDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995
- Floyd E. Davis Mortgage Corp. v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. HenkelDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
- Medhin v. HailuDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2011
- Benoit O. Brookens, II v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2018
- Thomas v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2012
- IN RE Q.B. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIADistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2015
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.