Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Frederic Clay BARTLETT v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, 1933 — 67 F.2d 984 · caselaw · US
Tax
Frederic Clay BARTLETT v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
67 F.2d 984·United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit·1933
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
Frederic Clay BARTLETT v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.
No. 4900.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit,
Nov. 2, 1933.
J. F. Dammann, of Chicago, Ill., for petitioner.
Sewall Key, of Washing-ton, D. C., for respondent.
Before ALSCHULER, EVANS, and SPARKS, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Pursuant to stipulation of counsel, it is now here ordered and adjudged by this court that the petition for review of the decision of the United States Board of Tax Appeals, entered on July 16, 1932, in this eause be, and the same is hereby, dismissed.