Towne v. Eisner, 245 U.S. 418 (1918), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that "a stock dividend based on accumulated profits was not 'income' within the true intent of the statute." Congress passed a new law in reaction to Towne v. Eisner and so the case was soon overturned by the Supreme Court in Eisner v. Macomber. It includes the quotable passage: “A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged; it is the skin of a living thought and may vary greatly in colour and content according to the circumstances and time in which it is used.” ― Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
Attributes | Values |
---|
rdf:type
| |
rdfs:label
| - Towne v. Eisner (en)
- 湯恩訴艾斯納案 (zh)
|
rdfs:comment
| - Towne v. Eisner, 245 U.S. 418 (1918), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that "a stock dividend based on accumulated profits was not 'income' within the true intent of the statute." Congress passed a new law in reaction to Towne v. Eisner and so the case was soon overturned by the Supreme Court in Eisner v. Macomber. It includes the quotable passage: “A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged; it is the skin of a living thought and may vary greatly in colour and content according to the circumstances and time in which it is used.” ― Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. (en)
- 湯恩訴艾斯納案(Towne v。Eisner; 245 US 418(1918)),是美國最高法院的一宗案件。在該案中,法院裁定“基於累積利潤的股票股利並非該法規的真實意圖之"收入"”。國會針對湯恩訴艾斯納案通過了一項新法律,接著該案件很快被最高法院在中推翻掉。 (zh)
|
foaf:name
| - (en)
- Towne v. Eisner, Collector of United States Internal Revenue for the Third District of the State of New York (en)
|
dct:subject
| |
Wikipage page ID
| |
Wikipage revision ID
| |
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
| |
Link from a Wikipage to an external page
| |
sameAs
| |
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
JoinMajority
| - White, Day, Van Devanter, Pitney, McReynolds, Brandeis, Clarke (en)
|
ParallelCitations
| |
USPage
| |
USVol
| |
ArgueDate
| |
ArgueYear
| |
case
| |
courtlistener
| |
DecideDate
| |
DecideYear
| |
findlaw
| |
fullname
| - Towne v. Eisner, Collector of United States Internal Revenue for the Third District of the State of New York (en)
|
Holding
| - A stock dividend based on accumulated profits is not "income." (en)
|
justia
| |
Litigants
| |
majority
| |
loc
| |
has abstract
| - Towne v. Eisner, 245 U.S. 418 (1918), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that "a stock dividend based on accumulated profits was not 'income' within the true intent of the statute." Congress passed a new law in reaction to Towne v. Eisner and so the case was soon overturned by the Supreme Court in Eisner v. Macomber. It includes the quotable passage: “A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged; it is the skin of a living thought and may vary greatly in colour and content according to the circumstances and time in which it is used.” ― Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. (en)
- 湯恩訴艾斯納案(Towne v。Eisner; 245 US 418(1918)),是美國最高法院的一宗案件。在該案中,法院裁定“基於累積利潤的股票股利並非該法規的真實意圖之"收入"”。國會針對湯恩訴艾斯納案通過了一項新法律,接著該案件很快被最高法院在中推翻掉。 (zh)
|
Concurrence
| |
cornell
| |
googlescholar
| |
Overruled
| |
prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
page length (characters) of wiki page
| |
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
is Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
of | |