TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Posselius v. United States

EDWARD J. POSSELIUS v. United States

Posselius v. United States, 31 F. Supp. 161 (Ct. Cl. 1940)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
United States Court of Claims · Federal Specialty Courts
Decided
February 5, 1940
Docket
No. 43980
Judges
Greek, Littleton, Whalet, Whitaker, Williams
Citations
31 F. Supp. 16190 Ct. Cl. 51924 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 3961940 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 117

Opinion of the Court — Littleton

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Littleton, Judge,

delivered tbe opinion of the court:

Plaintiff contends,that the interest of $4,900.34 paid to and received by him in 1984, under the circumstances set forth in the findings, was exempt from tax under the provisions of section 22 (b) (4) (A) of the Revenue Act of 1934 ( 48 Stat. 680 ) as being interest upon an obligation of a. state, territory, or a political subdivision of the State of Michigan. For the reasons set forth in the case of the Williams Land Co. v. United States, decided this date, ante p. 499, we hold that the interest in question was taxable and was properly included in plaintiff’s gross income for 1934. Plaintiff is, therefore, not entitled to recover and the petition is dismissed. It is so ordered.

Whitaker, Judge; Williams, Judge; Greek, Judge; and Whalet, Chief Justice, concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1942: 21943: 119422026peak 1942 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Kieselbach v. Commissioner317 U.S. 399 (1943)
  2. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Kieselbach127 F.2d 359 (3d Cir. 1942)
  3. Holley v. United States124 F.2d 909 (6th Cir. 1942)

Most recent

  1. Kieselbach v. Commissioner317 U.S. 399 (1943)
  2. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Kieselbach127 F.2d 359 (3d Cir. 1942)
  3. Holley v. United States124 F.2d 909 (6th Cir. 1942)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list