Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Estate of Mary Mason, Deceased, Herbert L. Harris, Administrator, and Robert Mason v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

566 F.2d 2

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1977-12-14
Topic
general

How later courts describe this case

  • affirming “the existence of a general principle that 2 admiralty courts of this nation are empowered to carry into effect the maritime 3 decrees of foreign admiralty courts”
  • “The [attorney-client] privilege does not allow the withholding of documents simply because they are the product of an attorneyclient relationship . . . . It must also be demonstrated that the information is confidential.”
  • “The [attorney-client] privilege does not allow the withholding of documents simply because they are the product of an attorney- 12 client relationship . . . . It must also be demonstrated that the information is confidential.”
  • bank deposits are prima facie evidence of income

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Estate of Mary Mason, Deceased, Herbert L. Harris, Administrator, and Robert Mason v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
314 opinions
ESTATE MASON v. COMM. OF INTERNAL REVENUE,566 F.2d 2(6th Cir. 1977)
ESTATE OF MARY MASON, DECEASED, HERBERT L. HARRIS, ADMINISTRATOR, AND ROBERT
MASON, PETITIONERS-APPELLANTS, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
RESPONDENT-APPELLEE.
No. 76-1667.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
December 14, 1977.
Henry A. Bornstein, Bornstein Wishnow, Southfield, Mich., for petitioners-appellants.

Scott P. Crampton, Gilbert Andrews, Asst. Attys. Gen., Tax Div., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., Meade Whitaker, Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, D.C., for respondent-appellee.
[1] ORDER
Before EDWARDS and ENGEL, Circuit Judges, and THORNTON,fn*Senior District Judge.
[2] On receipt and consideration of an appeal from a Tax Court decision determining an income tax deficiency for 1966 and 1967 totaling $51,616.65, plus a negligence penalty of $2,580.83.

[3] The judgment of the Tax Court is affirmed for the reasons set forth in the opinion of the Tax Court reported at64 T.C. 651.Page 574
  1. Honorable Thomas P. Thornton, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division, sitting by designation. ↩