Fellowship Foundation v. District of Columbia

D.C. Circuit

Fellowship Foundation v. District of Columbia

179 F.2d 56, 86 U.S. App. D.C. 40

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedDecember 19, 1949

Docket10153_1

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 179 F.2d 56 (Fellowship Foundation v. District of Columbia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fellowship Foundation v. District of Columbia, 179 F.2d 56, 86 U.S. App. D.C. 40 (D.C. Cir. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from a decision of the Board of Tax Appeals for the District of Columbia affirming assessments for the fiscal years 1947-48-49 on the real estate of petitioner, which it claimed to be exempt from taxation under Title 47, § 801a(n), Supp. VI, District of Columbia Code 1940. The Board, in affirming the assessment, held: (1) that the building was not primarily and regularly used for religious worship and study, and therefore was not exempt; and (2) that there was no evidence upon which to base any apportionment of valuation under section 2 of said Act.

We agree with the conclusions of the Board.

Although respondent raises a question as to whether an apportionment could, in any event, be made in view of the first conclusion of the Board, as this question need not now be decided we express no opinion concerning it. The decision of the Board is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from a decision of the Board of Tax Appeals for the District of Columbia affirming assessments for the fiscal years 1947-48-49 on the real estate of petitioner, which it claimed to be exempt from taxation under Title 47, § 801a(n), Supp. VI, District of Columbia Code 1940. The Board, in affirming the assessment, held: (1) that the building was not primarily and regularly used for religious worship and study, and therefore was not exempt; and (2) that there was no evidence upon which to base any apportionment of valuation under section 2 of said Act.

We agree with the conclusions of the Board.

Although respondent raises a question as to whether an apportionment could, in any event, be made in view of the first conclusion of the Board, as this question need not now be decided we express no opinion concerning it. The decision of the Board is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

179 F.2d 56, 86 U.S. App. D.C. 40, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fellowship-foundation-v-district-of-columbia-cadc-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack