Reed's Estate v. Scofield

Citation186 F.2d 133
Decision Date05 January 1951
Docket NumberNo. 13253.,13253.
PartiesREED'S ESTATE et al. v. SCOFIELD, Collector of Internal Revenue.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

Thomas O. Shelton, Jr., Wright Matthews, Dallas, Tex., for appellants.

Edward J. P. Zimmerman, Ellis N. Slack, Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen., Washington, D. C., Theron Lamar Caudle, Asst. Atty. Gen., Henry W. Moursund, U. S. Atty., San Antonio, Tex., for appellee.

Before HUTCHESON, Chief Judge, and HOLMES and RUSSELL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The sole question in this case involves the correctness of the finding of the trial Court, against the contention of the taxpayer suing for a refund, that such plaintiff had failed to show that an oil and mineral lease became finally worthless in the year 1941. The establishment of loss in such year was essential to the plaintiff's claim for recovery since the deduction therefor was claimed for the year 1941. The Commissioner had allowed the claim for the year 1940 but had disallowed it as accruing from a loss sustained during 1941. Upon consideration of the facts and circumstances in the case, we conclude that the finding of the trial Judge is supported by the evidence. Cf. Mine Hill & Schuylkill Haven R. Co. v. Smith, 3 Cir., 184 F.2d 422.

The judgment appealed from is

Affirmed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Pigott, In re
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • March 23, 1982
    ...to be strictly enforced. "Modern administration requires a definitive cut-off date past which claims may not be filed," said the Court. 186 F.2d 133. In Mellen, Judge Goodrich speaking for the court stated, Mellen, supra, at 38. Even where the equities have weighed strongly in favor of exte......
  • In re Mellen Manufacturing Company
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • February 14, 1961
    ...to be strictly enforced. "Modern administration requires a definitive cutoff date past which claims may not be filed," said the Court. 186 F.2d 133. It is true that this decision had to do with a filing of claims in a reorganization proceeding but everything said is applicable here also. Se......
  • In re Valley Forge Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • February 7, 1983
    ...to be strictly enforced. `Modern administration requires a definitive cut-off date past which claims may not be filed,\' said the Court." 186 F.2d 133. Mellen, supra, at Even where the equities have weighed strongly in favor of extending the time period, we have upheld the strict six month ......
  • IN RE FLEMING CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • October 3, 1985
    ...to be strictly enforced. "Modern administration requires a definitive cut-off date past which claims may not be filed," said the Court. 186 F.2d 133. (287 F.2d 37, More recently, in In Re Pigott, 684 F.2d 239 (CCA 3, 1982) the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit reaffirmed this decision,......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT