Harry TROTZ and Camille Trotz, Petitioners,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.
United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
June 10, 1966.
June 10, 1966.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Leland B. Franks, Albuquerque, N. M., for petitioners.
William A. Friedlander, Attorney, Department of Justice (Richard M. Roberts, Acting Asst. Atty. Gen., and Meyer Rothwacks, Harry Baum, Lee A. Jackson, and David O. Walter, Attorneys, Department of Justice, on the brief), for respondent.
Eugene J. Brenner, San Francisco, Cal. (Janin, Morgan, Brenner & Freeman, San Francisco, Cal., on the brief), amicus curiae.
Before MURRAH, Chief Judge, and BREITENSTEIN and SETH, Circuit Judges.
United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit.
BREITENSTEIN, Circuit Judge.
Petitioners, husband and wife, seek review of a Tax Court decision1 affirming the Commissioner's assessment of an income tax deficiency for the tax years 1958 and 1959. The issue is whether a gain on an instalment sale of depreciable property by taxpayer to Trotz Construction, Inc., is taxable as a long-term capital gain. Section 1239 of the Internal Revenue Code of 19542 provides...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
