Burnet v. Henry
283 U.S. 229, 51 S. Ct. 416, 75 L. Ed. 995, 1931 U.S. LEXIS 141, 9 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1433
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the Court.
The question in this case is the same as that which has been determined against the respondent in Burnet v. Houston, ante, p. 223. The subscription to the fund described in our opinion in that case was not made by respondent direct, but by her brother, Samuel F. Houston, acting as her agent. Otherwise the facts are the same; and upon the authority of the Houston case the judgment of the court below, 39 F. (2d) 358, is
Reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Burnet v. Henry, 283 U.S. 229, 51 S. Ct. 416, 75 L. Ed. 995, 1931 U.S. LEXIS 141, 9 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1433 (1931).
283 U.S. 229 (Burnet v. Henry) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Loth v. Loth
35 N.W.2d 542 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1949)