Legal Opinion

Pokorny Realty Co. v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided June 6, 1932No. L-30PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WILLIAMS, Judge.

The plaintiff claims that during the taxable year ending May 31, 1923, it was, within the meaning of the applicable statutes, affiliated with two other corporations, to wit, M. Pokorny & Sons, Limited, and Pokorny Estate, Inc.; that during the taxable years ending, respectively, May 33, 1924, and May 31, 3926, it was affiliated with M. Pokorny & Sons, Limited; and that it is entitled to have its tax liability for those years computed on the basis of such affiliations instead of on *240its own separate return, as held by the Commissioner of.Internal Revenue.

If plaintiff is entitled…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Handy & Harman v. BurnetSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Adolph Hirsch & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
  3. Alameda Inv. Co. v. McLaughlinDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1928
  4. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. City Button WorksCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1931
  5. Montana Mercantile Co. v. RasmussonDistrict Court, D. Montana · 1928

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Omaha Baum Iron Store, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1934
  2. Commissioner v. Samuel Bell & SonsCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API