Mayer v. United States

Good Law
285 F.2d 683·128 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 30·6 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 6087·1960 U.S. App. LEXIS 3082
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 9, 196016103_1California2,884 words

Opinion

Opinion

285 F.2d 683 61-1 USTC P 9147 , 128 U.S.P.Q. 30 Eva R. MAYER, Executrix of the Estate of Edwin E. Mayer, deceased, Harold J. Graves and Beulth F. Graves, Thomas O. Meyer and Pauline Meyer, Augusta Kelly, and The Estate of Raymond F. Kelly, deceased, Augusta Kelly, Residuary Legatee, Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. No. 16103. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. Dec. 9, 1960. Mautz, Souther, Spaulding, Denecke & Kinsey, Arno H. Denecke, William H. Kinsey, James R. Moore, Davidson, Duffy & Stout, Carl E. Davidson, Portland, Or., for appellants. Charles K. Rice, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lee A. Jackson, Joseph F. Goetten, Helen A. Buckley, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., C. E. Luckey, U.S. Atty., Edward J. Georgeff, Asst. U.S. Atty., Portland, Or., for appellee. Before POPE, CHAMBERS and HAMLEY, Circuit Judges; CHAMBERS, Circuit Judge. 1 A patent of one Gruber on a device called the Viewmaster has resulted in a commercial success, at least until someone makes a better one. 2 Gruber, on the license of his retained one half interest in the basic patent, has secured capital gains treatment and, thus, lower federal income taxes for the taxable…

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.