Mente v. Eisner
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Action by Eugene W. Mente against Mark Eisner, Collector of Internal Revenue. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the Court
WARD, Circuit Judge.
Section II, subdivision 2B, of the Act of October 3, 1913 (38 Stat. 167), provides that in computing net income for purposes of normal tax there shall be allowed as a deduction:
«* * * Fourth, losses actually sustained during the year, incurred in trade or arising from fires, storms, or shipwreck, and not compensated for by insurance or otherwise.”
Mente, a member of the firm of Mente & Co., engaged in the business of manufacturing jute bags and bagging, cotton bags and materials for covering cotton bales, filed his income returns for the year March 1 to December 31, 1913,…
2Cited by39 opinions
- Fackler v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1943
- Boomhower v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1947
- Snyder v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Washburn v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1931
- Phipps v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1931
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.