JANEWAY ET UX.
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE; SHIELDS V. SAME
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the Tax Court's factual determination that payments were capital contributions, supported by substantial evidence, could not be disturbed.
Taxpayers made payments to a corporation, which the Tax Court found to be capital contributions. The appellate court reviewed the Tax Court's factual …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Capital Contribution cases and more on FLexlaw
FRANK, Circuit Judge.
We read the findings of the Tax Court taken together with its opinion1 as saying that, as a matter of fact, all the payments made by the taxpayers to the corporation were capital contributions of such character that, as against any third persons (such as, e.g., persons contracting with the corporation) the taxpayers would have to be regarded as stockholders and nothing else. As the Tax Court’s conclusion rests upon a determination of fact supported by substantial evidence,2 we cannot disturb it, even under a restricted interpretation of Dobson v. Commissioner, 320 U.S. 489, 64 S.Ct. 239.3 Accepting that conclusion, the decision of the Tax Court is correct.
Affirmed.
That we may do so, see, e.g., Insurance & Title Guarantee Co. v. Commissioner, 2 Cir., 36 F. 2d 842, 845; California Iron Yards Co. v. Commissioner, 8 Cir., 47 F. 2d 514, 518; Producers’ Creamery Co. v. United States, 5 Cir., 55 F. 2d 104, 108; Emerald Oil Co. v. Commissioner, 10 Cir., 72 F. 2d 681, 683; Flynn v. Commissioner, 5 Cir., 77 F. 2d 180, 183; California Barrel Co., Inc. v. Commissioner, 9 Cir., 81 F. 2d 190, 193; Baker v. Commissioner, 6 Cir., 115 F. 2d 987, 989.
Involved is the question of the credibility of the witnesses as to the taxpayers’ intentions, a question surely for the Tax Court.
See Paul, Dobson v. Commissioner: The Strange Ways of Law and Fact (1944), 57 Harv.L.Rev. 753, 822-831; Buckminster’s Estate v. Commissioner, 2 Cir., 1944, 147 F. 2d 331.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (16 total)
-
John v. Rowan, 219 F.2d 51 (5th Cir. 1955)
-
Maloney v. Spencer, 172 F.2d 638 (9th Cir. 1949)
-
Tyler v. Tomlinson, 414 F.2d 844 (5th Cir. 1969)
Previewing 3 of 16 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Dobson v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 320 U.S. 489 (U.S. 1943)
- Emerald Oil Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 72 F.2d 681 (10th Cir. 1934)
- Ins. & Title Guar. Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 36 F.2d 842 (2d Cir. 1929)
- Cal. Iron Yards Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 47 F.2d 514 (9th Cir. 1931)
- Peyton Norville v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue, 77 F.2d 180 (5th Cir. 1935)
- Buckminster's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 147 F.2d 331 (2d Cir. 1944)
- Producers' Creamery Co. v. United States, 55 F.2d 104 (5th Cir. 1932)
- Baker v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 115 F.2d 987 (6th Cir. 1940)
- Cal. Barrel Co., Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 81 F.2d 190 (9th Cir. 1936)