Posselius v. United States

Court of Claims

Posselius v. United States

31 F. Supp. 161, 90 Ct. Cl. 519, 24 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 396, 1940 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 117

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedFebruary 5, 1940

DocketNo. 43980

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 31 F. Supp. 161 (Posselius v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Posselius v. United States, 31 F. Supp. 161, 90 Ct. Cl. 519, 24 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 396, 1940 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 117 (cc 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Littleton, Judge,

delivered tbe opinion of the court:

Plaintiff contends,that the interest of $4,900.34 paid to and received by him in 1984, under the circumstances set forth in the findings, was exempt from tax under the provisions of section 22 (b) (4) (A) of the Revenue Act of 1934 (48 Stat. 680) as being interest upon an obligation of a. state, territory, or a political subdivision of the State of Michigan. For the reasons set forth in the case of the Williams Land Co. v. United States, decided this date, ante p. 499, we hold that the interest in question was taxable and was properly included in plaintiff’s gross income for 1934. Plaintiff is, therefore, not entitled to recover and the petition is dismissed. It is so ordered.

Whitaker, Judge; Williams, Judge; Greek, Judge; and Whalet, Chief Justice, concur.

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

Littleton, Judge,

delivered tbe opinion of the court:

Plaintiff contends,that the interest of $4,900.34 paid to and received by him in 1984, under the circumstances set forth in the findings, was exempt from tax under the provisions of section 22 (b) (4) (A) of the Revenue Act of 1934 (48 Stat. 680) as being interest upon an obligation of a. state, territory, or a political subdivision of the State of Michigan. For the reasons set forth in the case of the Williams Land Co. v. United States, decided this date, ante p. 499, we hold that the interest in question was taxable and was properly included in plaintiff’s gross income for 1934. Plaintiff is, therefore, not entitled to recover and the petition is dismissed. It is so ordered.

Whitaker, Judge; Williams, Judge; Greek, Judge; and Whalet, Chief Justice, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 F. Supp. 161, 90 Ct. Cl. 519, 24 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 396, 1940 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/posselius-v-united-states-cc-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack