Contracts · MBE-tested
Ida A. VAN DYKE, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent; Cleve W. VAN DYKE, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
63 F.2d 1020·United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth 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
Ida A. VAN DYKE, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent. Cleve W. VAN DYKE, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.
Nos. 6949, 6950.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
March 9, 1933.
William E. Brooks, of Miami, Ariz., and R. A. Bartlett, of New York City, for petitioners.
G. A. Youngquist, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Sewall Key and Hayner N. Larson, Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen. (C. M. Charest, Gen. Counsel, and Thomas R. Callahan, Sp. Atty., Bureau of Internal Revenue, both of Washington, D. C., of counsel), for respondent.
Before WILBUR, SAWTELLE, and MACK, Circuit Judges.
Rehearing denied May 3, 1933.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Upon consideration of the records, briefs, and oral argument of respondent, ordered order of Board of Tax Appeals in each of above causes affirmed upon the authority of Burnet v. Clark, 287 U. S. -, 53 S. Ct. 207, 77 L. Ed. -, and Dalton v. Bowers, 287 U. S. -, 53 S. Ct. 205, 77 L. Ed. -, both decided December 12, 1932.