Paul H. Anderson and Frances M. Anderson v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Herbert E. Wiese and Mary C. Wiese v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Fifth Circuit

Paul H. Anderson and Frances M. Anderson v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Herbert E. Wiese and Mary C. Wiese v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

614 F.2d 535, 45 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1080, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 19302, 1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 9382

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMarch 24, 1980

Docket77-2048

StatusPublished

This text of 614 F.2d 535 (Paul H. Anderson and Frances M. Anderson v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Herbert E. Wiese and Mary C. Wiese v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Paul H. Anderson and Frances M. Anderson v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Herbert E. Wiese and Mary C. Wiese v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 614 F.2d 535, 45 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1080, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 19302, 1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 9382 (5th Cir. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

614 F.2d 535

80-1 USTC P 9318, 80-1 USTC P 9382

Paul H. ANDERSON and Frances M. Anderson, Petitioners-Appellants,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.
Herbert E. WIESE and Mary C. Wiese, Petitioners-Appellants,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.

Nos. 77-2048, 77-2049.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

March 24, 1980.

Gregory A. Pletsch, David Irvin Couvillion, Theodore L. Jones, Baton Rouge, La., for petitioners-appellants.

M. Carr Ferguson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Gilbert E. Andrews, Act. Chief, App. Sect., William Estabrook, Atty., U. S. Dept. of Justice, Internal Rev. Service, Leon G. Wigrizer, Acting Chief Counsel, Stanley S. Shaw, Jr., Atty., Tax Div., Dept. of Just., Washington, D. C., for C. I. R. in both cases.

Lester Stein, Acting Chief Counsel, IRS, Washington, D. C., for C. I. R. in 77-2048.

Stuart E. Seigel, Internal Rev. Service, Washington, D. C., for C. I. R. in 77-2049.

Before SIMPSON, TJOFLAT, and HILL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Taxpayers appeal from a Tax Court ruling that they did not qualify under I.R.C. Sec. 1201 for a twenty-five percent capital gains tax rate on their sale of stock. 1976 T.C.M. p76,362 (P-H). The narrow issue before us is whether the Tax Court erred in concluding that the taxpayers had not sold their stock pursuant to a binding contract in effect on November 9, 1969. We cannot say that the Tax Court's finding of fact on this issue is clearly erroneous or that it erred in holding that the alleged agreement was unenforceable. The Tax Court therefore is

AFFIRMED.

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

614 F.2d 535

80-1 USTC P 9318, 80-1 USTC P 9382

Paul H. ANDERSON and Frances M. Anderson, Petitioners-Appellants,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.
Herbert E. WIESE and Mary C. Wiese, Petitioners-Appellants,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.

Nos. 77-2048, 77-2049.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

March 24, 1980.

Gregory A. Pletsch, David Irvin Couvillion, Theodore L. Jones, Baton Rouge, La., for petitioners-appellants.

M. Carr Ferguson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Gilbert E. Andrews, Act. Chief, App. Sect., William Estabrook, Atty., U. S. Dept. of Justice, Internal Rev. Service, Leon G. Wigrizer, Acting Chief Counsel, Stanley S. Shaw, Jr., Atty., Tax Div., Dept. of Just., Washington, D. C., for C. I. R. in both cases.

Lester Stein, Acting Chief Counsel, IRS, Washington, D. C., for C. I. R. in 77-2048.

Stuart E. Seigel, Internal Rev. Service, Washington, D. C., for C. I. R. in 77-2049.

Before SIMPSON, TJOFLAT, and HILL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Taxpayers appeal from a Tax Court ruling that they did not qualify under I.R.C. Sec. 1201 for a twenty-five percent capital gains tax rate on their sale of stock. 1976 T.C.M. p76,362 (P-H). The narrow issue before us is whether the Tax Court erred in concluding that the taxpayers had not sold their stock pursuant to a binding contract in effect on November 9, 1969. We cannot say that the Tax Court's finding of fact on this issue is clearly erroneous or that it erred in holding that the alleged agreement was unenforceable. The Tax Court therefore is

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

614 F.2d 535, 45 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1080, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 19302, 1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 9382, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paul-h-anderson-and-frances-m-anderson-v-commissioner-of-internal-ca5-1980.