Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Eccles
Cases that cite this one
33 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Lane v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1956)
- Boyter v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1980)
- H. David Boyter and Angela M. Boyter v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service (4th Cir. 1981)
- Estate of Goldwater v. Comm'r (United States Tax Court 1975)
- Wright v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1974)
- Borax v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1963)
- Untermann v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1962)
- Sheppard v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1959)
- Garsaud v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1957)
- Gersten v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1957)
- Sullivan v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1957)
- Gary A. Wolens v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 2017)
- Gene L. Moretti v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (2d Cir. 1996)
- Production House Ltd. Partnership v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1992)
- Calhoun v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1992)
- Johnson v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1980)
- Criscuolo v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1978)
- Forrest v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1978)
- Estate Of Wesley A. Steffke, Deceased (7th Cir. 1976)
- Wisconsin Valley Trust Co. v. Commissioner (7th Cir. 1976)
- Weinkrantz v. Weinkrantz (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1974)
- Marcia W. Seaman v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (9th Cir. 1973)
- Eno v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1965)
- Wondsel v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1964)
- Chap v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1964)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
This is a petition to review a decision of the Tax Court holding that taxpayer was entitled to file a joint income tax return with his wife for the taxable year ending prior to the date upon which he became finally divorced although an interlocutory decree had been entered prior to the expiration of the year. We think that the decision of the Tax Court was clearly correct for reasons adequately stated in its opinion. See 19 T.C. 1049.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.