Legal Opinion
Superintendent of Five Civilized Tribes v. Commissioner
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided May 20, 1935No. 817PublishedCited by 119 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice McReynolds
Sandy Fox, for whom this suit was instituted, is a full-blood Creek Indian. Certain funds, said to have been derived' from his restricted allotment, in excess of his needs, were invested. The proceeds therefrom were collected and held in trust under direction of the Secretary of Interior. The question now presented is whether this income was subject to the federal tax laid by the 1928 Revenue Act (c. 852, §§ 11, 12, 45 Stat. 791). The Commissioner, the Board of Tax Appeals and the court below answered in the affirmative.
Petitioner maintains that the court should have followed the rule which…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Helvering v. Stockholms Enskilda BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Irwin v. GavitSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Choate v. TrappSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Choteau v. BurnetSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- Heiner v. Colonial Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by119 opinions
- Chickasaw Nation v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Squire v. CapoemanSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Federal Power Commission v. Tuscarora Indian NationSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Texas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Oklahoma Tax Commission v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
114 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.