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.
BADGLEY v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, 1932 — 59 F.2d 203 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
BADGLEY v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
59 F.2d 203·United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·1932
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
BADGLEY v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.
No. 374.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
June 6, 1932.
William Cogger and William D. Harris, both of Washington, D. C., for petitioner.
G. A. Youngquist, Asst. Atty. Gen., Sewall Key and Helen R. Carloss, Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen. (C. M. Charest, Gen. Counsel, Bureau of Internal Revenue, of Washington, D. C., and W. Frank Gibbs and Frank M. Thompson, Sp. Attys., Bureau of Internal Revenue, both of Washington, D. C., of counsel), for respondent.
Before MANTON, SWAN, and CHASE, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
The petitioner is a hnilding contractor, and the Board found that he kept his books on the completed contract method and made his returns accordingly. Section 212 (b) of the Revenue Act of 1921, 42 Stat. 237; article 36b, Treasury Regulation 62. There is evidence to support these findings of fact. The contention that article 36 was invalid because inconsistent with the accounting periods is without merit. It provides a method of determining income attributable to each animal period. It is a valid regulation. Burnet v. Sanford & Brooks Co., 282 U. S. 359, 51 S. Ct. 150, 75 L. Ed. 383; Bent v. Commissioner, 56 F.(2d) 99 (C. C. A. 9). Wo may accept the finding of the Board that the petitioner kept his books on the completed contract basis. The Board had the opportunity to examine the petitioner’s books, and, having rekehed the conclusion it did, we must give effect to its findings. Phillips v. Commissioner, 283 U. S. 589, 51 S. Ct. 608, 75 L. Ed. 1289. Upon the facts as found, the conclusion of the Board must be affirmed.
Order affirmed.