Reynolds v. Cooper

291 U.S. 192, 54 S. Ct. 356, 78 L. Ed. 725, 1934 U.S. LEXIS 984, 1 C.B. 250, 13 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 851, 4 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 1222
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedJanuary 15, 1934
DocketNos. 227—229
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 291 U.S. 192 (Reynolds v. Cooper) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Reynolds v. Cooper, 291 U.S. 192, 54 S. Ct. 356, 78 L. Ed. 725, 1934 U.S. LEXIS 984, 1 C.B. 250, 13 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 851, 4 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 1222 (1934).

Opinion

Mr. Justice McReynolds

delivered the opinion of the Court.

In each of these causes a beneficiary received from trustees royalties arising from a lease of oil and gas lands. in Wyoming. Taxes were exacted upon the full amounts so received. Separate ■ suits were brought to recover proper allowances for depletion. The respondents prevailed in both of the courts below. Here the causes were heard together.

*193 The Solicitor General says — “ The question is identical with that raised in Helvering v. Falk, No. 225, October Term, 1933, and the argument made in the Government’s brief in that case is likewise applicable here. . . . There is therefore substantially no difference between the position of the beneficiaries in this case and the Falk case.”

The judgments below are affirmed upon authority of Helvering v. Falk, decided this day, ante, p. 183.

Affirmed.

Mr. Justice Brandeis, Mr. Justice Stone, and Mr. Justice Cardozo think that these cases are to be distinguished from No. 225, Helvering y. Falk, just decided, because of the nature of the duties imposed upon the trustees, and of the remainder interest granted to the beneficiaries by the trust instrument presently involved, and accordingly concur in the result.

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

Related

Maimonides Medical Center v. United States
54 F. Supp. 3d 194 (E.D. New York, 2014)
Kaufman v. Comm'r
2010 T.C. Memo. 89 (U.S. Tax Court, 2010)
Garwood Irrigation Co. v. Comm'r
126 T.C. No. 12 (U.S. Tax Court, 2006)
Garwood Irrigation Company v. Commissioner
126 T.C. No. 12 (U.S. Tax Court, 2006)
Dana Distributors, Inc. v. Commissioner
1988 T.C. Memo. 514 (U.S. Tax Court, 1988)
Jud Plumbing & Heating v. Commissioner
5 T.C. 127 (U.S. Tax Court, 1945)
Jud Plumbing & Heating, Inc. v. Commissioner
5 T.C. 127 (U.S. Tax Court, 1945)
Inland Development Co. v. Commissioner of Int. Rev.
120 F.2d 986 (Tenth Circuit, 1941)
Hurley v. United States
10 F. Supp. 365 (N.D. Oklahoma, 1935)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
291 U.S. 192, 54 S. Ct. 356, 78 L. Ed. 725, 1934 U.S. LEXIS 984, 1 C.B. 250, 13 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 851, 4 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 1222, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reynolds-v-cooper-scotus-1934.