Mathew J. Spiesman, Jr., and Mary Spiesoman v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Good Law
260 F.2d 940·2 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5973·1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 5543
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 17, 195815752_1California4,341 words

Opinion

Opinion

Carter, J.

This case involves the validity of a family partnership, Section 191 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, [as added by Section 340(b) of the Revenue Act of 1951, c. 521, 65 Stats. 452], 26 U.S.C.A. § 191 and Section 3797 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939 [as amended by Section 340(a) of the Revenue Act of 1951, supra], 26 U.S.C.A. § 3797 . The texts of the statutes are set forth in the margin.

The Proceedings Below

The petitioner, Mathew J. Spiesman, Jr., and his wife, filed joint federal income tax returns for the calendar year 1951 and 1952, and the family partnership, “Spiesman & Sons” filed information returns on Form 1065 for the same year. The matters in controversy concern only one month of 1951, December 1st to December 31st, and all of 1952. The petitioner, Mary Spiesman, the wife, is a party solely because she and her husband filed joint returns for the years in question. She is not otherwise involved in this controversy.

The Commissioner determined deficiencies existed in the return of income and tax, notice was mailed, and the taxpayers filed a petition with the Tax Court for redetermination of deficiencies, within the statutory time. The case was heard by the…

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.