Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. William N. Fry, Jr., and Mable W. Fry, Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. William Stokes Walters and Milly Fry Walters
This text of 283 F.2d 869 (Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. William N. Fry, Jr., and Mable W. Fry, Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. William Stokes Walters and Milly Fry Walters) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
283 F.2d 869
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner,
v.
William N. FRY, Jr., and Mable W. Fry, Respondents.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner,
v.
William Stokes WALTERS and Milly Fry Walters, Respondents.
No. 14095.
No. 14096.
United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.
October 18, 1960.
John J. Pajak, Washington, D. C., Charles K. Rice, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lee A. Jackson and I. Henry Kutz, Attorneys, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C., on brief, for petitioner.
Charles H. Davis, Memphis, Tenn., Montedonico, Boone, Gilliland, Heiskell & Loch, Memphis, Tenn., on brief, for respondents.
Before McALLISTER, Chief Judge, and CECIL and O'SULLIVAN, Circuit Judges.
ORDER.
The above cause coming on to be heard on the record, the briefs of the parties and argument of counsel in open court, and the court being duly advised:
Now, therefore, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that the decision of the Tax Court be and is hereby affirmed upon the opinion of Judge Tietjens. 31 T.C. 522.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
283 F.2d 869, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commissioner-of-internal-revenue-v-william-n-fry-jr-and-mable-w-fry-ca6-1960.