Citation network
United States Vs. Stewart
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Nov 12, 1940
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 60 (1940) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. StewartSearch
-
U.S. 60 (1940) United States v. StewartSearch
-
a) of the Revenue Act of 1928. Applying Willcuts v. BunnSearch
-
is here on certiorari to resolve a conflict of the decision below (9 Cir., 106 F.2d 405) with Stern Brothers & Co. v. CommissionerSearch
-
is a generic term amply broad to include capital gains for purposes of the income tax. Merchants' Loan & Trust Co. v. SmietankaSearch
-
true that Congress will be presumed to have used a word in its usual and well settled sense. Old Colony Railroad Co. v. CommissionerSearch
-
the bonds is clearly different from income derived from dealings or transactions in the bonds. As stated in Willcuts v. BunnSearch
-
the gain may be regarded as 'the creation of capital, industry and skill.' Tax Commissioner v. PutnamSearch
-
farm loan bonds. The later act can therefore be regarded as a legislative interpretation of the earlier act ( Cope v. CopeSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
entitled Page 311 U. S. 65 to great weight in resolving any ambiguities and doubts. Cf. United States v. StafoffSearch
-
delegated cannot estop the United States even by an affirmative undertaking to waive or surrender a public right. Utah v. UnitedSearch
-
Wilber National Bank v. UnitedSearch
-
Page 311 U. S. 71 of Congressional purpose as to make inapposite the application of the reasoning of Willcuts v. BunnSearch
-
statute. Yet those who seek an exemption from a tax must rest it on more than a doubt or ambiguity. Bank of Commerce v. TennesseeSearch
-
U.S. 416, 163 U. S. 423 . Exemptions from taxation cannot rest upon mere implications. United States Trust Co. v. HelveringSearch
-
U. S. 57 , 307 U. S. 60 . As stated by Mr. Justice Cardozo in Trotter v. TennesseeSearch
-
Pacific Co., Ltd. v. JohnsonSearch
-
those situations where the subject matter of the exemption was directly, not indirectly or remotely, involved. Murdock v. WardSearch
-
Hale v. StateSearch
-
See Helvering v. NewSearch
-
See Agricultural Securities Corp. v. CommissionerSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court United States v. StewartSearch
-
Applying Willcuts v. BunnSearch
-
Stern Brothers & Co. v. CommissionerSearch
-
Merchants' Loan & Trust Co. v. SmietankaSearch
-
Tax Commissioner v. PutnamSearch
-
Cf. United States v. StafoffSearch
-
Utah v. UnitedSearch
-
of Willcuts v. BunnSearch
-
Trotter v. TennesseeSearch
-
United States v. FreemanSearch
-
Bank of Commerce v. TennesseeSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial