Legal Opinion
Wood Harmon Corporation v. United States
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided May 24, 1962PublishedCited by 44 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DAWSON, District Judge.
In this action, which was brought by the plaintiff to obtain a tax refund, both parties have moved for summary judg ment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C. The essential facts of the case have been stipulated to by the parties and are not in 'dispute.
The plaintiff is the transferee of United Cities Realty Corporation (hereinafter called United), a New York corporation which was formerly the owner of an undivided five-sixths interest in premises commonly known as 71 Washington Square South in the City of New York (hereinafter called…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Kieselbach v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Patrick McGuirl, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Rev.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1935
- J. Ungar, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Jesse Ungar (Transferee) v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1957
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Henry Hess Co. Henry Hess Co. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1954
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. KieselbachCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1942
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by44 opinions
- Wood Harmon Corporation v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
- Estate of Yaeger v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
- Feinberg v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1966
- Planned Investments, Inc., Michigan Corporation v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1989
- Fibel v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1965
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.