Legal Opinion

Wirkkala v. United States

District Court, W.D. Washington

Decided February 23, 1960No. 2401PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BOLDT, District Judge.

By this action plaintiffs seek recovery of income taxes paid under protest on deficiencies assessed for the years 1952, 1953 and 1954. The question for decision is whether plaintiffs acquired the necessary proprietary interest in logs cut pursuant to the contracts involved for capital gain treatment under Int. Rev.Code of 1939, § 117, 26 U.S.C.A. § 117, and Int.Rev.Code of 1954, § 631, 26 U.S.C.A. § 631, on income derived from sale of the logs in the years in question. Plaintiffs so assert. The government contends plaintiffs were merely a contract service logger.

Fair…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Carlen v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1953
  2. United States v. Pete Johnson, F. Douglas Mavor, Jane Kendle Mavor, Nelson T. Bruce, and Cleo BruceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1958
  3. Gilmore v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1960

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Timber Conservation Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1962
  2. Carpenter v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1961
  3. Carpenter v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1961
  4. Lansing v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1964
  5. Shaffer v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1960

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

Powered by the Exa API