green
Positive treatment
2.3 score
Treatment trajectory · 1940 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1940
1983
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Carroll v. Commissioner
Smith , 40 B.T.A. 1038 (1939) , affirmed per curiam 113 F. 2d 114 *37 (C.A. 2, 1940).] Hence, the fact that the petitioner's education is helpful to him in the performance of his employment does not establish that its cost is deductible as a business expense.
cited
Cited "see"
James A. And Isabelle Carroll v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
See Smith v. Commissioner, 40 B.T.A. 1038 (1939), affirmed per curiam, 113 F.2d 114 (2d Cir. 1940).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Simenstad v. United States
Davidson v. Commissioner, supra; Casey v. Commissioner, supra; see also Smith v. Commissioner, 40 B.T.A. 1038 (1939), aff’d. per curiam 113 F.2d 114 (C.A.2d 1940); Kroll v. Commissioner, 49 T.C. 557 (1968). 8.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Robert Hoopes and Rae S. Hoopes v. Union Oil Company of California, a Corporation
See also Westmoreland Asbestos Co. v. Johns-Manville Corp., 30 F.Supp. 389 (S.D.N.Y.1939), aff’d 113 F.2d 114 (2d Cir. 1940).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
WESTMORELAND ASBESTOS COMPANY, Inc., Home Insulation Company, Inc., Westchester Asbestos Corporation, Rock Wool Insulation Corporation, Plaintiffs, W. G. Kuehn, Inc., and William G. Kuehn, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
JOHNS-MANVILLE CORPORATION, Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, John A. Roebling's Sons Company of New York, Stellar Corporation, and Hiram E. Manville, Defendants-Appellees.
v.
JOHNS-MANVILLE CORPORATION, Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, John A. Roebling's Sons Company of New York, Stellar Corporation, and Hiram E. Manville, Defendants-Appellees.
391.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Jul 8, 1940.
113 F.2d 114
Swan, Clark and Patterson, Circuit Judges.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Weissberger & Leichter, of New York City (M. M. Leichter and John L. Ketcham, both of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiffs-appellants.
Davis, Polk, Wardwell, Gardiner & Reed, of New York City (Theodore Kiendl, A. S. Edmonds, and Francis W. Phillips, all of New York City, of counsel), for defendants-appellees.
Before SWAN, CLARK and PATTERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed on opinion below, 30 F.Supp. 389, in which decision was adhered to on reargument in 32 F.Supp. 731, without appellate costs.