Legal Opinion

Helburn v. Ballard

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided April 7, 1936No. 6774PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Per curiam

It appearing that the Commissioner of Internal Revenue was unauthorized by section 302 (b) of the Revenue Act of 1924, 43 Stat. 253, 304 (26 U.S.C.A. § 411 note) to include in the gross estate of the decedent, S. Thruston Ballard, any amount representing dower interest of appellee because, having taken under the will of the decedent, the appellee acquired no rights at the time of his death as dowress in his real estate, Perry v. Wilson, 183 Ky. 155, 162, 208 S.W. 776; Schuette v. Bowers, 40 F.(2d) 208, 211 (C.C.A.2); Randolph v. Craig, 267 F. 993, 996 (D.C.) ; see also Briscoe v. Craig, 32…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Bingham v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  2. Industrial Trust Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  3. Perry v. WilsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1919
  4. Randolph v. CraigDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1920
  5. Schuette v. BowersCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Bailey v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1939
  2. Colonial Trust Co. v. KraemerDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1945
  3. Crosley v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1966
  4. Trust Co. v. . Maxwell, Comr.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  5. Chase Nat. Bank v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1939

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API