Hans S. Hollander and Clemence Blum Hollander v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Good Law
248 F.2d 523·52 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 664·1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 5270
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 21, 195715357California1,463 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mathews, J.

Respondent, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, determined that, in respect of the income taxes of petitioners, Hans S. Hollander and Clemence Blum Hollander, husband and wife, for 1948 and 1949, there were deficiences aggregating $10,814.17 — $6,866.59 for 1948 and $3,947.58 for 1949. Admitting that there were deficiencies, but alleging that they did not exceed $4,652.83— $4,186.29 for 1948 and $466.54 for 1949 — petitioners sought and obtained a redetermination by the Tax Court of the United States. The Tax Court made findings, filed an opinion and entered a decision sustaining respondent’s determination. The decision is here for review.

The facts were stipulated and are summarized as follows:

On an undisclosed date between March 6, 1946, and June 12, 1946, Idy, then a a resident of Nevada, brought a divorce action against Hans in the Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada in and for Clark County, hereafter called the Nevada court. In that action, a decree of divorce was entered in her favor on June 12, 1946. Thereby the agreement of March 6, 1946, was ratified, confirmed, approved and made a part of the decree and the parties were ordered to comply therewith.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.