Hinckley v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
A one-third interest in the Hinckley Beach Canning Co., a partnership, stood in petitioner's name. One-half of the amount required for the acquisition of that interest was the separate property of the petitioner's wife. She may report, therefore, in her separate return, one-half of the profit realized on the sale of the partnership's assets, all of the which was charged to the petitioner by the Commissioner.
1Opinion of the Court
*313OPINION.
MoRkis:
The only question raised by the pleadings is whether the profit realized upon the sale of certain assets of the Hinckley Beach Canning Co. is taxable to the petitioner, as determined by *314the Commissioner, or whether, as contended by the petitioner, his wife may report one-half thereof as income from her separate property or from a partnership existing between them.
The investment of Mrs. Hinckley in the hardware business at Glendale consisted of money given to her by her mother, of money acquired from her mother’s estate, dividends on her stock, and salary. Section 162 of the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Perkins v. Sunset Tel. and Tel. Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
- Smith v. San Francisco & North Pacific Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
- Kaltschmidt v. WeberCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Wren v. WrenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Smith v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Rupple v. KuhlCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1949
- United States v. AtkinsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1951
- Hallahan v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1928
- Hinckley v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1927