Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google
News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
John R. and Margaret M. Masline, Petitioners-appellants, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent-appellee
United States Court of Appeals, - 462 F.2d 1328
John R. Masline, pro se.
Scott P. Crampton, Asst. Atty. Gen., Meyer Rothwacks, Atty., Tax Div., Dept. of Justice, K. Martin Worthy, Chief Counsel, Raymond W. Sifly, I.R.S., Daniel B. Rosenbaum, Charles R. Burnett, Attys., Tax Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for respondent-appellee.
Before GEWIN, AINSWORTH and SIMPSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
The Tax Court held that taxpayer John R. Masline's tax home within the meaning of Sec. 162 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 26 U.S.C. Sec. 162, was at his principal place of employment in Atlanta, Georgia, rather than at the residence he maintained for his wife and family in Augusta, 168 miles away. The only issue on this appeal is whether the determination of the tax court was correct. We hold that it was and for reasons expressed in Curtis v. C. I. R., 449 F.2d 225 (5th Cir. 1971) affirm. See Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Flowers, 326 U.S. 465, 66 S.Ct. 250, 90 L.Ed. 203 (1946); Jones v. C. I. R., 444 F.2d 508 (5th Cir. 1971).
Affirmed.