Corporations
L. H. PHILO CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
50 F.2d 1079·United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·1931
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
L. H. PHILO CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.
No. 355.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
June 8, 1931.
W. A. Seifert, of Pittsburgh, Pa., and M. N. Fisher, of Washington, D. C. (Davis, Polk, Wardwell, Gardiner & Reed, of New York City, and Smith, Shaw, McClay & Sei-fert, of Pittsburgh, Pa., of counsel), for petitioner.
G. A. Youngquist, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Helen R. Carloss and Sewall Key, Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen. (C. M. Charest, Gen. Counsel, Bureau of Internal Revenue, and William E. Davis, Sp. Atty., Bureau of Internal Revenue, both of Washington, D. C., of counsel), for respondent.
Before L. HAND, AUGUSTUS N. HAND, and CHASE, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
In accordance with the confession of error of the respondent, the depreciation of the petitioner’s assets for the years 1924 and 1925 should be based upon the sum, $70,348.-62. Otherwise the order is affirmed.