U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1950

Tilney v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided June 23, 1950 · No. 13139_1 · Hutcheson, McCORD, Per Curiam, Russell

182 F.2d 1009; 39 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 611; 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 3976 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Vincent F. Kilborn, Mobile, Ala., for petitioner., S. Dee Hanson, Ellis N. Slack, Morton K. Rothschild, Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen., Theron Lamar Caudle, Asst. Atty. Gen., Charles Oliphant, Chief Counsel, W. Herman Schwatka, Sp. Atty., Bureau of Internal Revenue, Washington, D. C., for resondent.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Bye v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1972)

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

PER CURIAM.

Sustaining the Commissioner’s determination, the Tax Court held on the pleadings that petitioner was not entitled to deductions on account of three dependents, the minor children of a deceased nephew of the taxpayer, actually residing with, and actually dependent upon, her for their support.

Petitioner, agreeing that the dependents for whom she claimed deductions are not named in the definition of dependents in Sec. 25(b) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, 26 U.S.C.A. § 25(b) (3),. is here insisting that those definitions are not exclusive but only illustrative, and that the dependents for whom she claims deductions come within its principle.

We cannot agree. The judgment of the Tax Court was right. It is

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.