Opinion

Putnam v. United States

  • 32 F.3d 911
  • 74 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 6344
  • 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 24399
  • 1994 WL 486875
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Filed
Sep 9, 1994
Status
Published
Author
Garza
On the bench
Garza, Demoss, Parker
Cited by
7 cases

"In fact, 'home'-in the usual case-means 'work.' "

How later courts described this case

  • "In fact, 'home'-in the usual case-means 'work.' "

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

REYNALDO G. GARZA, Circuit Judge,

concurring specially;

I agree with everything in the very fine opinion of Judge DeMoss.

As a senior judge, I write specially to tell amicus and my fellow senior judges that this was not the best of cases to try the validity or extent of 28 U.S.C. §§ 374 and 456 and their relationship to the tax laws.

If during his active service Judge Putnam had lived in Lafayette and upon his taking senior status he had moved and started residing in Abbeville, I think the result in this case might well have been different.

As Judge DeMoss points out, the result in this ease is because of the facts involved and it will be the law only in cases with similar facts in the future.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.