Legal Opinion

Sproul v. State Tax Commission

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided May 29, 1963PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Connell, J.

Plaintiff brings this suit to set aside a deficiency assessment resulting from defendant’s rejection of a claimed deduction for expenses incurred in defending a murder charge. Defendant appeals from a decree of the Oregon Tax Court allowing the deduction as an “ordinary and necessary” expense incurred by plaintiffs in carrying on their business. The applicable statute is ORS 316.305 (1), which reads as follows:

“In computing net income there shall be allowed as deductions:
“(1) All the ordinary and necessary expenses, paid during the tax year in carrying on any trade or business, including * *

Pl…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Commissioner v. HeiningerSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  2. Kornhauser v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
  3. Lilly v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1952

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1979
  2. Sproul v. State Tax CommissionOregon Tax Court · 1962
  3. Henderson v. State Tax CommissionOregon Tax Court · 1963
  4. Pacific Coast Land Co. v. Department of RevenueOregon Tax Court · 1971
  5. State v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1979

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API