Elmer G. Overly and Mary H. Overly v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Third Circuit

Elmer G. Overly and Mary H. Overly v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

243 F.2d 576, 52 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 594, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 5092

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedApril 29, 1957

Docket12132

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 243 F.2d 576 (Elmer G. Overly and Mary H. Overly v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Elmer G. Overly and Mary H. Overly v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 243 F.2d 576, 52 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 594, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 5092 (3d Cir. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The decisive question in this case is whether the income received by one of the taxpayers by way of salary for his personal services was income from a “trade or business regularly carried on by the taxpayer” within the meaning of section 122(d) (5) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, 26 U.S.C.A. § 122(d) (5), relating to the net operating loss deduction. The Tax Court held that it was such income and upheld the Commissioner’s computation of the taxpayers’ income tax liability for the year 1951 on that basis. In so doing the Court followed and applied the decision of our brethren of the Second Circuit in Folker v. Johnson, 1956, 230 F.2d 906, in which this question was squarely raised and decided. We find ourselves in complete accord with the conclusions reached in that case and think it unnecessary to elaborate them here. It is sufficient to say that the decision under review must be affirmed upon the authority of that case and that to the extent that Hughes v. Commissioner, 10 Cir., 1930, 38 F.2d 755, decides otherwise we think it wrongly decided and do not choose to follow it.

The decision of the Tax Court will be affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The decisive question in this case is whether the income received by one of the taxpayers by way of salary for his personal services was income from a “trade or business regularly carried on by the taxpayer” within the meaning of section 122(d) (5) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, 26 U.S.C.A. § 122(d) (5), relating to the net operating loss deduction. The Tax Court held that it was such income and upheld the Commissioner’s computation of the taxpayers’ income tax liability for the year 1951 on that basis. In so doing the Court followed and applied the decision of our brethren of the Second Circuit in Folker v. Johnson, 1956, 230 F.2d 906, in which this question was squarely raised and decided. We find ourselves in complete accord with the conclusions reached in that case and think it unnecessary to elaborate them here. It is sufficient to say that the decision under review must be affirmed upon the authority of that case and that to the extent that Hughes v. Commissioner, 10 Cir., 1930, 38 F.2d 755, decides otherwise we think it wrongly decided and do not choose to follow it.

The decision of the Tax Court will be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

243 F.2d 576, 52 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 594, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 5092, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elmer-g-overly-and-mary-h-overly-v-commissioner-of-internal-revenue-ca3-1957.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack