IN RE STAFFORD

Citator

Cited By

• Williams v. Patterson, 286 F.2d 333 (5th Cir. 1961)
  …taxpayer or of his employer. Moreover, such an expenditure must be necessary or appropriate to the development and pursuit of the business or trade.” See also Peurifoy v. Commissioner, 1958, 358 U.S. 59, 79 S.Ct. 104, 3 L.Ed.2d 30, rehearing denied 358 U.S. 913, 79 S.Ct. 227, 3 L.Ed.2d 234, in which the Court recognized the validity of the rule, that travel expenses are deductible if required by the exigencies of the employee’s trade or business. In Kenneth Waters, 1949, 12 T.C. 414 the Tax Court exposed t…
• Stafford v. Superior Court OF State of Cal., 272 F.2d 407 (9th Cir. 1959)
  …255 P. 2d 872. He persisted in these efforts and w'as adjudged in contempt of court. There then ensued habeas corpus proceedings in which the contempt penalty was upheld. Application of Stafford, 160 Cal.App.2d 110, 324 P. 2d 967, certiorari denied 358 U.S. 913, 79 S.Ct. 242, 3 L.Ed.2d 233. In the forty-six paragraphs of the first cause of action, in which the history of this litigation is recited, Stafford alleges that there were errors of fact and law which rendered these judgments void. It is alleged t…
• United States v. Wheeler, 275 F.2d 94 (3d Cir. 1960)
  …perienced trial judge characterizes as “abundant evidence”. The judgment of the district court will be affirmed. . United States v. Wheeler, 3 Cir., 1958, 256 F. 2d 745, certiorari denied 358 U.S. 873, 79 S.Ct. 111, 3 L.Ed.2d 103, rehearing denied 358 U.S. 913, 79 S.Ct. 229, 3 L.Ed.2d 234. . Appellant testified that: “Mr. Kreiger had called me on the telephone and said that he was from the Internal Revenue Service, had my ’50 and ’51 returns, and would like to come over to my office and see me about the…