Pfaff v. Comm'r, 312 U.S. 646 (1941)
Case details
Bluebook Citation
Pfaff v. Comm'r, 312 U.S. 646 (1941)
Full caption
PFAFF et al., EXECUTORS, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.
Country
United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
Mar. 31, 1941
Majority
Reed (Justice)
PFAFF et al., EXECUTORS, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT.
No. 479. Argued March 4, 5, 1941.—Decided March 31, 1941. Decided upon the authority of Helvering v. Estate of Enright, ante, p. 636. P. 647. 113 F. 2d 114, affirmed.
Certiorari, 311 U. S. 639, to review a judgment which affirmed a decision of the Board of Tax Appeals sustaining a deficiency assessment.
Mr. Laurence Sovik for petitioners.
Mr. Gordon Tweedy, with whom Solicitor General Biddle, Assistant Attorney General Clark, and Messrs. Sewall Key and Morton K. Rothschild were on the'brief, for respondent.
Mr. Justice Reed delivered the opinion of the Court.
This case presents the same question as Helvering v. Estate of Enright, ante, p. 636. Petitioners are the executors of a deceased physician who during 1935 was a member of a medical partnership and entitled to forty per cent of its profits. He died December 25, 1935, on which date there were outstanding about $69,000 of partnership accounts receivable for services rendered to patients during his lifetime. His death worked a dissolution of the partnership under § 62(4) of the New York Partnership Law. The decedent’s interest in these p. 647accounts came to over $27,000. Both he and the partnership were on a cash basis. Pursuant to § 42 of the Revenue Act of 1934 and article 42(1) of Treasury Regulations 86, the commissioner included the decedent’s share of the accounts receivable in his 1935 income, though only at about one-fifth of face value. The Board of Tax Appeals sustained the commissioner’s view of the statute, and also ruled that the valuation of the decedent’s interest in the accounts at one-fifth of face value was amply supported. The Circuit Court of Appeals, without writing an opinion, affirmed the Board. 113 F. 2d 114. Because of a conflict with the Third Circuit’s decision in the Enright case, supra, we granted certiorari.
There is no relevant difference between these facts and Helvering n. Estate of Enright. For the reasons stated in that opinion it was proper to include in the decedent’s 1935 income the fair value of his interest in the accounts.
Affirmed.
(no text on this page in the source reporter)
DECISIONS PER CURIAM, ETC., FROM JANUARY 7, 1941, THROUGH MARCH 31, 1941.*
No. 86. Stewart v. Pennsylvani a. Appeal from the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Argued January 6, 1941. Decided January 13f 1941. Per Curiam: The judgment is affirmed. Curry v. McCanless, 307 U. S. 357; Graves v. Elliott, 307 U. S. 383. Mr. Chief Justice Hughes, Mr. Justice McReynolds, and Mr. Justice Roberts dissent. Mr. Charles I. Thompson, with whom Mr. William A. Schnader was on the brief, for appellant. Mr. Frederic L. Ballard entered an appearance for appellant. Mr. E. Russell Shockley, Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania, with whom Mr. Claude T. Reno, Attorney General, was on the brief, for appellee. Reported below: 338 Pa. 9; 12 A. 2d 444.
No. 210. Manufacturers Trust Co. et al. v. Pru - dence Securities Advisory Group et al. ;
No. 211. Endelman et al. v. Prudence -Bonds Corp, et al ..;
No. 214. Kelby, Trustee, v. Prudence Securities Advisory Group et al. ;
No. 259. Prudence Realization Corp. v. Prudence - Bonds Corp.; and
No. 273. Davison v. Prudence Securities Advisory Group et al. On petitions for writs of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. January 13, 1941. Per Curiam: The petitions for writs of p. 650certiorari are granted and the judgment is reversed on the authority of Reconstruction Finance Corp. n. Prudence Securities Advisory Group, 311 U. S. 579. Messrs. Dan Gordon Judge, John Ross Delafield, Edwin De T. Bechtel, Ralph W. Crolly, and Emery H. Sykes for petitioners in No. 210. Messrs. Jacob A. Freedman and Edward Endelman for petitioners in No. 211. Mr. Charles A. Frueauff for petitioner in No. 214. Mr. Irving L. Schanzer for petitioner in No. 259. Mr. Alfred T. Davison pro se, in No. 273. Reported below: 111 F. 2d 37.
No. 284. Denham v. Munson Line, Incorporate d. On petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. January 13, 1941. Per Curiam: The petition for writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment is reversed on the authority of Reconstruction Finance Corp. n. Prudence Securities Advisory Group, 311 U. S. 579. Mr. I. L. Broadwin for petitioner. Mr. Francis L. Driscoll for respondent.
No. —. Ex parte John J. Sheridan. January 13, 1941. Application denied.
No. —, original. Ex parte Chester W. Campbell; No. —, original. Ex parte R. Gordon Whitman; and
No. —, original. Ex parte Herbert A. Burgtorf. January 13, 1941. Motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus denied.
No. —, original. Ex parte Fred J. Becker. January 13, 1941. The rule to show cause is discharged and the p. 651motion for leave to file petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied.
No. 255. Roddewig, Chairman, et al. v. Sears, Roe - buck & Co.; and
No. 256. Roddewig, Chairman, et al. v. Montgom - ery Wabd & Co., Inc. January 13, 1941. State Tax Commission and Fred W. Nelson, present Chairman of the State Tax Commission, substituted as parties petitioners in the place and stead of Iowa State Board of Assessment and Review and Louis E. Roddewig, on motion of Mr. John E. Mulroney for the petitioners.
No. 315. Evans v. United States. Certiorari, 311 U. S. 635, to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. January 20, 1941. Per Curiam: On consideration of the stipulation between counsel for the petitioner and the Solicitor General, the orders of the Circuit Court of Appeals dismissing the appeal and denying petitioner’s motions to be furnished with a transcript of the record, for an extension of time within which to file a transcript of the record on appeal, and to remand the cause to the District Court for the purpose of permitting him to present a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence, are vacated. The cause is remanded to the Circuit Court of Appeals with directions to grant the petitioner reasonable extensions of time for the perfection of his appeal and to reconsider the motion to remand when the court shall have before it a transcript of the evidence. It is ordered that the mandate issue forthwith. Everett Ault Evans, pro se, and Mr. Richard H. Weis for petitioner. *Solicitor p. 652General Biddle, Assistant Attorney General Rogge, and Mr. William W. Barron* for the United States. Reported below: 113 F. 2d 935.
No. —. Ex parte Joseph J. McCarthy. January-20, 1941. Application denied.
No. 12, original. United States v. Alabama. January 20, 1941. The motion for leave to file the Bill of Complaint is granted and process is ordered to issue returnable Monday, March 3, next.
No. 689. Ohio ex rel. Squire, Superintendent of Banks in Charge of the Liquidation of The Guard - ian Trust Company, v. Brown et al. Appeal from the Supreme Court of Ohio. February 3, 1941. Per Curiam: The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a. properly presented federal question: (1) Cleveland & Pittsburgh R. Co. v. Cleveland, 235 U. S. 50, 53; Hiawassee Power Co. v. Carolina-Tenn. Co., 252 U. S. 341, 344; White River Co. v. Arkansas, 279 U. S. 692, 700; (2) Zadig v. Baldwin, 166 U. S. 485, 488; Live Oak Water Users’ Assn. v. Railroad Commission of California, 269 U. S. 354, 357-358; Lynch v. New York, 293 U. S. 52, 54. Mr. Thomas J. Herbert for appellant. Mr. Jack B. Dworken for appellees. Reported below: 137 Ohio St. 315; 29 N. E. 2d 362.
No. 11, original. Kansas v. Missouri. February 3, 1941. Honorable Dean G. Acheson, having accepted appointment as Assistant Secretary of State of the United States, has resigned as Special Master in this case and his resignation has been accepted.
No. —. Poresky v. Ely. February 3, 1941. Motion for leave to file application granted, and the application is denied.
No. —. Stoehr v. Minnesota. February 3, 1941. Application denied.
No. —, original. Ex parte Joseph F. Koleg;
No. —, original. Ex parte C. E. Phillips;
No. —, original. Ex parte J. B. King; and
No. —, original. Ex parte Orville Chester Garri - son. February 3, 1941. The motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus are denied.
No. —, original. Ex parte Mary M. Hughes. February 3, 1941. Motion for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus denied.
No. 312. Swanson, Secretary of State of Nebraska, et al. v. Buck et al. Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Nebraska. February 3, 1941. Pursuant to paragraph (c) of Rule 75 of the Rules of Civil Procedure and without prejudice to the future application of paragraph (e) of Rule 75, the motion of the appellees for a writ of certiorari to correct a diminution of the record is granted with respect to items 1 to 57 inclusive. The motion is also granted with respect to items 58 to 62 inclusive so far as the certification of docket entries and designations is concerned, which, however, are to be dispensed with in printing.