"proper and valid business considerations rather than an intent to make a capital investment’’
How later courts described this case
- "proper and valid business considerations rather than an intent to make a capital investment’’
- "it became apparent that [stock was] not an attractive investment by objective standards”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
*556 NICHOLS, Judge,
concurring:
I join in the decision of the court to adopt the commissioner’s recommended decision Per Curiam. I do not understand defendant to deny — it admitted on oral argument — -that if the commissioner’s fact findings are correct, this court’s decisions in Booth Newspapers, Inc. v. United States, 157 Ct.Cl. 886 , 303 F.2d 916 (1962), is wholly controlling as to the law. Defendant’s initial effort before us was to refute some of the findings, but under Rule 66 the presumption is that they are correct, and I do not see defendant’s burden as sustained. Therefore, this case does not stand for any legal proposition except that courts should follow their own precedents when applicable.
Plaintiff, not satisfied with its fact advantage, it is true did argue for a broader view of the law, and defendant then took issue, but this debate is not, as I understand it, in any way reflected in our decision.