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.
O. J. McQUISTION, Petitioner, L. L. McQuistion, Petitioner, O. J. McQuistion, Petitioner, R. S. McQuistion, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent, 1934 — 72 F.2d 1016 · caselaw · US
Tax
O. J. McQUISTION, Petitioner, L. L. McQuistion, Petitioner, O. J. McQuistion, Petitioner, R. S. McQuistion, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
72 F.2d 1016·United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·1934
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
O. J. McQUISTION, Petitioner, L. L. McQuistion, Petitioner, O. J. McQuistion, Petitioner, R. S. McQuistion, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.
Nos. 7632-7635.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Oct. 8, 1934.
Prank J. Wideman, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Robert H. Jackson, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Bureau of Internal Revenue, of Washington, D. C., for respondent.
Before WILBUR, SAWTELLE, and GARRECHT, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Upon motion of counsel for respondent in each of above causes and by direction of the court, ordered petition to review in each cause dismissed for failure of petitioner to file record and docket cause; mandates forthwith.