North Am. Loan & Thrift Co. No. 2 (Now Known as North Am. Fin. Corp. of Fulton Cnty.) v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 319 F.2d 132 (4th Cir. 1963). · Go Syfert
Search
North Am. Loan & Thrift Co. No. 2 (Now Known as North Am. Fin. Corp. of Fulton Cnty.) v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 319 F.2d 132 (4th Cir. 1963). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
13 citation events across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Baldarelli v. Commissioner
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Baldarelli v. Commissioner
unknown court · 1973 · confidence medium
Johnson , 53 T.C. 414 , 425 (1969) ; Howard Construction, Inc ., 43 T.C. 343 , 355 (1964) ; North American Loan & Thrift Co. *52 No. 2 , 39 T.C. 318 , 326 (1962) , affirmed per curiam 319 F. 2d 132 *60 (C.A. 4, 1963); Edward A. Kenney , 37 T.C. 1161 , 1169 (1962) .
cited Cited "see, e.g." MacEy Jewelry Corporation v. United States
5th Cir. · 1967 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also North American Loan & Thrift Co. v. Commissioner, 39 T.C. 318, 328-329 (ftnt. 3), affirmed per curiam, 319 F.2d 132 (4th Cir., 1963). 4 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
North American Loan & Thrift Company No. 2 (Now Known as North American Finance Corporation of Fulton County)
v.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue
8951_1.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Jun 20, 1963.
319 F.2d 132
Published

319 F.2d 132

NORTH AMERICAN LOAN & THRIFT COMPANY NO. 2 (Now Known as North American Finance Corporation of Fulton County), Petitioner,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

No. 8951.

United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit.

Argued June 13, 1963.

Decided June 20, 1963.

On petition to review the decision of the Tax Court of the United States.

Robert Ash, Washington, D. C. (Carl F. Bauersfeld, and Ash, Bauersfeld & Burton, Washington, D. C., on brief), for petitioner.

Philip B. Heymann, Atty., Dept. of Justice (Louis F. Oberdorfer, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lee A. Jackson, Harry Baum and Gilbert E. Andrews, Attys., Dept. of Justice, on brief), for respondent.

Before SOBELOFF, Chief Judge, and BRYAN and J. SPENCER BELL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

1

We affirm for the reasons stated by the Tax Court in the opinion of Judge Raum, 39 T.C. ____.

2

Affirmed.