Legal Opinion

Burges v. Commissioner

United States Board of Tax Appeals

Decided September 17, 1929No. Docket No. 25908Published

1. El Paso County Water Improvement District No. 1 and Hudspeth County Conservation District No. 1, held to be political subdivision of the State of Texas. 2. Petitioner, retained as an attorney for such districts on an annual basis, held to be an employee of such districts and his compensation exempt under section 1211 of the Revenue Act of 1926.

1Opinion of the Court

RICHARD F. BURGES, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT.

Burges v. Commissioner

Docket No. 25908.

United States Board of Tax Appeals

17 B.T.A. 275; 1929 BTA LEXIS 2324;

September 17, 1929, Promulgated

1. El Paso County Water Improvement District No. 1 and Hudspeth County Conservation District No. 1, held to be political subdivision of the State of Texas.

2. Petitioner, retained as an attorney for such districts on an annual basis, held to be an employee of such districts and his compensation exempt under section 1211 of the Revenue Act of 1926.

Richard F. Burges and W. C.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Houck v. Little River Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
  2. Wharton County Drainage Dist. No. 1 v. HigbeeCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1912
  3. Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Ward County Irrigation District No. 1Texas Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Parker v. El Paso County Water Improvement Dist. No. 1Court of Appeals of Texas · 1924
  5. Peyton Creek Irr. Dist. v. WhiteCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1921

2 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