Commissioner v. Wilcox: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
+cat |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
'''''Commissioner v. Wilcox''''', [[Case citation|327 U.S. 404]] ([[1946]]), was a case decided by the [[Supreme Court of the United States]]. |
'''''Commissioner v. Wilcox''''', [[Case citation|327 U.S. 404]] ([[1946]]), was a case decided by the [[Supreme Court of the United States]]. |
||
The issue presented in this case was whether embezzled money constituted taxable income to the embezzler under § 22(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939. |
The issue presented in this case was whether embezzled money constituted taxable income to the embezzler under § 22(a) of the [[Internal Revenue Code of 1939]]. |
||
Although the Court ruled that the embezzlement income was not taxable to the embezzler in ''Wilcox'', the Court later overruled this holding in ''[[James v. United States]]. |
Although the Court ruled that the embezzlement income was not taxable to the embezzler in ''Wilcox'', the Court later overruled this holding in ''[[James v. United States]]. |
||
Revision as of 03:37, 28 March 2007
| Commissioner v. Wilcox | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued January 8, 1946 Decided February 25, 1946 | |
| Full case name | Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Wilcox, et al. |
| Citations | 327 U.S. 404 (more) 66 S. Ct. 546; 90 L. Ed. 752; 1946 U.S. LEXIS 3084; 46-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) P9188; 34 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 811; 1946-1 C.B. 6; 166 A.L.R. 884; 1946 P.H. P72,014 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Murphy, joined by Stone, Black, Reed, Frankfurter, Douglas, Rutledge |
| Dissent | Burton |
| Jackson took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
| Laws applied | |
| § 22 (a) of the Internal Revenue Code | |
Overruled by | |
| James v. United States, 366 U.S. 213 (1961) | |
Commissioner v. Wilcox, 327 U.S. 404 (1946), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States.
The issue presented in this case was whether embezzled money constituted taxable income to the embezzler under § 22(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939.
Although the Court ruled that the embezzlement income was not taxable to the embezzler in Wilcox, the Court later overruled this holding in James v. United States.
 | This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |