KNETSCH ET UX.

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (24 total)

• Eastport S.S. Corp. v. The United States, 372 F.2d 1002 (Ct. Cl. 1967)
  …o. Niehaus & Co. v. United States, 153 F.Supp. 428, 432, 139 Ct.Cl. 605, 612 (1957); Zavodny v. United States, 152 F.Supp. 432, 139 Ct.Cl. 533 (1957); and Rough Diamond Co. [*1008] v. United States, 351 F. 2d 636, 173 Ct.Cl. 15 (1965), cert. denied, 383 U.S. 957, 86 S.Ct. 1221, 16 L.Ed.2d 300 (1966). There are many others. Contrast Catalina Properties, Inc. v. United States, 166 F.Supp. 763, 143 Ct.Cl. 657 (1958). . And which do not fall under another head of jurisdiction, such as a contract with the Unite…
• Miller v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue, 836 F.2d 1274 (10th Cir. 1988)
  …2d 700, 708-09 (10th Cir.1976) (“We agree with the IRS that in order to deduct a loss under § 165(c)(2) the taxpayer must show that profit was the primary motivation.”); Knetsch v. United States, 348 F. 2d 932, 936 & 938 (Ct.Cl. 1965), cert. denied, 383 U.S. 957, 86 S.Ct. 1221, 16 L.Ed.2d 300 (1966) (“The Supreme Court has said that the determinative question is whether the taxpayer's purpose in entering into the transaction was primarily for profit.”); Austin v. Comm’r, 298 F. 2d 583, 584 (2d Cir.1962) (“T…
• Chris Berg, Inc. v. The United States, 426 F.2d 314 (Ct. Cl. 1970)
  …bound by estoppel or acquiescence or even failing to protest. Nautilus Shipping Corp. v. United States, 158 F.Supp. 353, 141 Ct.Cl. 391 (1958). In Rough Diamond Co. v. United States, 351 F. 2d 636, 639-643, 173 Ct.Cl. 15, 20-27 (1965), cert. denied, 383 U.S. 957, 86 S.Ct. 1221, 16 L.Ed.2d 300 (1966), we analyzed the dif ferences as to contractor’s rights under contracts made in violation of law, when the law violated was or was not made for [*318] the benefit of the contracting party. It is superfluous to r…