Case Name: Leonard A. PETO and Vera Peto (Husband and Wife), Petitioners-Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1958-12-31
Citations: 262 F.2d 342
Docket Number: No. 159, Docket 25225
Parties: Leonard A. PETO and Vera Peto (Husband and Wife), Petitioners-Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 262
Pages: 342–342

Head Matter:
Leonard A. PETO and Vera Peto (Husband and Wife), Petitioners-Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 159, Docket 25225.
United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.
Argued Dec. 12, 1958.
Decided Dec. 31, 1958.
Louis G. Greenfield, New York City (Sidney W. Rothstein, New York City, on the brief), for petitioners-appellants.
Arthur I. Gould, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C. (Charles K. Rice,. Asst. Atty. Gen., and Lee A. Jackson and Robert N. Anderson, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., on the brief),, for respondent-appellee.
Before CLARK, Chief Judge, and HINCKS and LUMBARD, Circuit. Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We agree thoroughly with Judge Mur-dock's findings of fact and opinion that the losses in these ill-fated ventures cannot be considered "ordinary and necessary expenses paid in carrying on any trade or business" under I.R.C. 1939, § 23(a) (1) (A). Nor do we find basis for sustaining the taxpayers' belated claim that the losses were "ordinary and necessary expenses for the production or collection of income" under I.R.C.1939, § 23(a) (2).
Decision affirmed.