Case ID: f2d_175/html/0555-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Mario MORANO, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.
    No. 9844.
    United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.
    Argued June 10, 1949.
    Decided June 15, 1949.
    Rehearing Denied Aug. 16, 1949.
    Ralph G. Mesce, Newark, N. J. (Thomas Cantillo, Newark, N. J., Carl Abruzzese, Newark, N. J., on the brief), for petitioner.
    Harry Marselli, Washington, D. C. (Theron Lamar Caudle, Assistant Attorney General, Ellis N. Slack, Special Assistant to Attorney General, on the brief), for respondent.
    Before MARIS, GOODRICH and KA-LODNER, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

The sole question involved in this case was whether a partnership which may be recognized for tax purposes under the rule laid down in Commissioner v. Tower, 1946, 327 U.S. 280, 66 S.Ct. 532, 90 L.Ed. 670, 164 A.L.R. 1135, Lusthaus v. Commissioner, 1946, 327 U.S. 293, 66 S.Ct. 539, 90 L.Ed. 679, and Commissioner v. Sunnen, 1948, 333 U.S. 591, 68 S.Ct. 715, 92 L.Ed. 898, existed between the petitioner, his wife and his two children in 1943 and 1944. The Tax Court stated that on the entire record it could not conclude that this family really and truly intended to join together as a partnership. We cannot say that this conclusion was clearly erroneous. Accordingly the decision of the Tax Court will be affirmed.