# Haskell v. Commissioner

> United States Board of Tax Appeals · November 11, 1925 · 2 B.T.A. 1300

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4490574

## Case

- **Full name:** APPEAL OF KATHRYN M. HASKELL, OF THE ESTATE OF GEORGE S. HASKELL
- **Court:** United States Board of Tax Appeals
- **Decided:** November 11, 1925
- **Citations:** 2 B.T.A. 1300; 1925 BTA LEXIS 2080
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Sell, James, Littleton, Smith
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4490574

## Opinion text

. This is an appeal from the determination of a deficiency in income tax of George S. Haskell, deceased, for the calendar year 1921 in the amount of $236.27, arising from the holding of the Commissioner that a profit of $2,652.83 upon the sale of certain real estate was income to George S. Haskell during his lifetime. The executrix alleged in her petition that the said profit of $2,652.83 belonged to her.
FINDINGS OE FACT.
During the calendar year 1921 George S. Haskell, now deceased, was a resident of Chicago, Ill., engaged in business as a partner with one Isadore A. Grossman. In January, 1913, Kathryn M. Haskell, wife of George S. Haskell, and Isadore A. Grossman each contributed $1,500 for the purchase of certain real estate in the City of Chicago at a cost of $6,000; $3,000 being paid in cash and a mortgage given for $3,000. The title to the property was taken in the name of Kathryn M. Haskell. In December, 1921, this property was sold by Kathryn M. Haskell for $11,305.65, resulting in a total profit of $5,305.65. One-half of this profit belonged to Isadore A. Grossman and one-half, or $2,652.83, belonged to Kathryn M. Haskell.
DECISION.
The deficiency determined by the Commissioner is disallowed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4490574. Public record. Not legal advice.