Ralph D. Lambert and Margot Lambert, Ernest J. Henley and Barbara M. Henley, Martha Henley v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Second Circuit

Ralph D. Lambert and Margot Lambert, Ernest J. Henley and Barbara M. Henley, Martha Henley v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

338 F.2d 4

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedOctober 30, 1964

Docket28983-28985_1

StatusPublished

This text of 338 F.2d 4 (Ralph D. Lambert and Margot Lambert, Ernest J. Henley and Barbara M. Henley, Martha Henley v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ralph D. Lambert and Margot Lambert, Ernest J. Henley and Barbara M. Henley, Martha Henley v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 338 F.2d 4 (2d Cir. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

338 F.2d 4

Ralph D. LAMBERT and Margot Lambert, Ernest J. Henley and Barbara M. Henley, Martha Henley, Petitioners,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

Nos. 79-81.

Dockets 28983-28985.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued October 20, 1964.

Decided October 30, 1964.

Raymond F. Garrity, Washington, D. C. (Garrity, Ferguson & Phillipps, Carl A. Phillipps, Washington, D. C., on brief), for petitioners.

Edward B. Greensfelder, Jr., St. Louis, Mo. (Louis F. Oberdorfer, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lee A. Jackson and David O. Walter, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C.), for respondent.

Edward Pesin, Newark, N. J., for S. Arthur Stern, filed a brief as amicus curiae.

Before FRIENDLY, KAUFMAN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

We affirm the judgment of the Tax Court on the opinion of Judge Fay. Although the Commissioner might well have taken a more lenient view on the facts here presented, it is plain that the petitioners did not comply with requirements on which the Commissioner was entitled to insist.

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

338 F.2d 4

Ralph D. LAMBERT and Margot Lambert, Ernest J. Henley and Barbara M. Henley, Martha Henley, Petitioners,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

Nos. 79-81.

Dockets 28983-28985.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued October 20, 1964.

Decided October 30, 1964.

Raymond F. Garrity, Washington, D. C. (Garrity, Ferguson & Phillipps, Carl A. Phillipps, Washington, D. C., on brief), for petitioners.

Edward B. Greensfelder, Jr., St. Louis, Mo. (Louis F. Oberdorfer, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lee A. Jackson and David O. Walter, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C.), for respondent.

Edward Pesin, Newark, N. J., for S. Arthur Stern, filed a brief as amicus curiae.

Before FRIENDLY, KAUFMAN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

We affirm the judgment of the Tax Court on the opinion of Judge Fay. Although the Commissioner might well have taken a more lenient view on the facts here presented, it is plain that the petitioners did not comply with requirements on which the Commissioner was entitled to insist.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

338 F.2d 4, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ralph-d-lambert-and-margot-lambert-ernest-j-henley-and-barbara-m-ca2-1964.