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.
Isidore B. DOCKWEILER, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent, 1934 — 69 F.2d 1003 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Isidore B. DOCKWEILER, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
69 F.2d 1003·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
Isidore B. DOCKWEILER, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.
No. 7311.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
March 23, 1934.
Frank P. Jenal, of Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner.
Frank J. Wideman, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Sewall Key, Lucius A. Buck, and S. Dee Hanson, Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen., for respondent.
Before WILBUR and SAWTELLE, Circuit Judges, and NORCROSS, District Judge.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Upon consideration of the record and briefs filed in above cause, and after oral argument on behalf of tbe respective parties, ordered order of Board of Tax Appeals affirmed.