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.
Hiram C. WILSON v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, 1931 — 55 F.2d 1086 · caselaw · US
Tax
Hiram C. WILSON v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
55 F.2d 1086·United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth 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
Hiram C. WILSON v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.
No. 435.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.
Sept. 16, 1931.
Camden R. MeAtee, of Washington, D. C., and John G. Ellinghansen, of Tulsa, OkL, for petitioner.
C. M. Charest, Gen. Counsel, Bureau of Internal Revenue, of Washington, D. C., for respondent.
Before LEWIS and MeDERMOTT, Circuit Judges, and SYMES, District Judge.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Petition for review dismissed for failure to prosecute.