Franklin v. United States

Third Circuit

Franklin v. United States

83 F.2d 1010, 17 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1236, 1936 U.S. App. LEXIS 2719

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedMay 29, 1936

DocketNo. 5957

StatusPublished

This text of 83 F.2d 1010 (Franklin v. United States) 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

Franklin v. United States, 83 F.2d 1010, 17 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1236, 1936 U.S. App. LEXIS 2719 (3d Cir. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this income tax case it appears the taxpayer corporation, the Keystone Stores Corporation, claimed to deduct as a loss in its income for 1928 losses made by the Keystone Grocery Company. The Commissioner rejected such claim and, on distribution of the assets of the taxpayer corporation under a receivership in the court below, presented such claim. The matter was referred to a master, who reported the loss was deductible from taxpayer’s income, but the court differed from the master and held the loss was not deductible, filing an opinion which stated' and discussed in detail and at length the somewhat complicated facts.

In view of the fact that a further opinion would be but a labored attempt to marshal in different language what was so well stated in the trial judge’s opinion, and as the case turns on its own individual facts, we limit ourselves to affirming the case on the opinion below.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this income tax case it appears the taxpayer corporation, the Keystone Stores Corporation, claimed to deduct as a loss in its income for 1928 losses made by the Keystone Grocery Company. The Commissioner rejected such claim and, on distribution of the assets of the taxpayer corporation under a receivership in the court below, presented such claim. The matter was referred to a master, who reported the loss was deductible from taxpayer’s income, but the court differed from the master and held the loss was not deductible, filing an opinion which stated' and discussed in detail and at length the somewhat complicated facts.

In view of the fact that a further opinion would be but a labored attempt to marshal in different language what was so well stated in the trial judge’s opinion, and as the case turns on its own individual facts, we limit ourselves to affirming the case on the opinion below.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 F.2d 1010, 17 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1236, 1936 U.S. App. LEXIS 2719, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/franklin-v-united-states-ca3-1936.