Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Helvering Vs. Griffiths

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Mar 01, 1943

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

68 entries 6 linked 62 unlinked
Show
  1. Cullinan Vs. Walker US Supreme Court · Apr 30, 1923
  2. Weiss Vs. Stearn US Supreme Court · May 26, 1924
  3. Eisner Vs. Macomber US Supreme Court · Mar 08, 1920
  4. Towne Vs. Eisner US Supreme Court · Jan 07, 1918
  5. United States Vs. Phellis US Supreme Court · Nov 21, 1921
  6. Southern Pacific Co. Vs. Jensen US Supreme Court · May 21, 1917
  7. U.S. 371 (1943) U.S. Supreme Court Helvering v. Griffiths
    Search
  8. U.S. 371 (1943) Helvering v. Griffiths
    Search
  9. Internal Revenue Code, did not intend to tax such stock dividends, and that there is no occasion to reconsider Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  10. regulations thereunder afford a basis on which we may reconsider the decision in Page 318 U. S. 372 Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  11. his determination, and the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed on the authority of Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  12. S. 373 Was Congress thereby saying that such a dividend as we have here is not being taxed, in view of the Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  13. might have a wider scope. Towne v. Eisner
    Search
  14. chiefly for the reason that income had not been severed from capital or realized by such a distribution. Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  15. Page 318 U. S. 374 Although Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  16. pointed out in reorganization cases that a distinction existed between the type of stock dividend before it in Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  17. and one which gave the stockholder a different stock, or different proportionate interests, than before. United States v. Phellis
    Search
  18. Rockefeller v. United
    Search
  19. Marr v. United
    Search
  20. March 30, 1936, this Court granted certiorari in Koshland v. Helvering
    Search
  21. her gain on the redemption of the old stock and added to her tax. She argued that her dividend, notwithstanding Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  22. that the dividend in question did constitute income within the Sixteenth Amendment, and in effect limited Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  23. was foreclosed by the belief that Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  24. Revenue, setting forth cases dealing with the taxability of stock dividends, sixteen of which, including Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  25. the constitutional immunity of the true stock dividend recognized or declared in Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  26. Congressman Vinson called particular and favorable attention to an article approving the decision in Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  27. provisions had been drafted to avoid the limitations set upon Congressional power by Page 318 U. S. 387 Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  28. to accomplish their purpose, and that fully effective provisions would entail a challenge of the authority of Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  29. f)(1) not as repudiating Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  30. by taxing stock dividends, but as exempting them and adopting the existing decisions, including Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  31. and enacted, contained provisions Page 318 U. S. 390 intended to conform with the authority of Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  32. on the contrary, there was continued recognition of the Page 318 U. S. 393 authority of Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  33. This action followed the decision of this Court in Helvering v. Brunn
    Search
  34. the taxpayer was able to sever increment from his original capital. It preceded by ten days the decision in Helvering v. Horst
    Search
  35. decisions Page 318 U. S. 394 undermined further the original theoretical bases of the decision in Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  36. The Government says that the time has come when Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  37. reconsideration of that decision. It should be observed that the question of the constitutional validity of Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  38. f)(1) to do what Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  39. be found in the decisions of this Court, Page 318 U. S. 395 and, when these dividends were received, Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  40. first enacted states in terms that the statute was not intended to lay a tax on the facts of this case and of Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  41. nontaxable. In White v. Winchester
    Search
  42. of the respondent except for the Government's assertion that it should be disregarded upon the authority of Helvering v. Hallock
    Search
  43. f)(1) in abeyance until the Treasury should decide that the time was ripe to challenge Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  44. f)(1) in suspense until the termination of years of litigation is in conflict with our recent decision in Parker v. Motor
    Search
  45. Its statement in such terms was due to this Court's decision in Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen
    Search
  46. on Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  47. sometimes requires us to adhere to an unsatisfactory rule to avoid unfortunate practical results from a change. Davis v. Department
    Search
  48. Treasury that it has no intention of harassing taxpayers with respect to liability for past years, and that, if Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  49. Congressional authority, we are powerless to do so. That being the case, we cannot reach the reconsideration of Eisner v. Macomber
    Search
  50. Clark, Eisner v. Macomber
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial