How Can We Help?
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."[1] 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.[2]
References
- ^ Towne v. Eisner, 245 U.S. 418 (1918).
This article incorporates public domain material from judicial opinions or other documents created by the federal judiciary of the United States.
- ^ Towne v Eisner, 245 U.S. 418 425 (1918), quoted in Roberts, Harold S. (1986) [1966] Roberts' Dictionary of Industrial Relations 3rd ed. (Washington D.C.; Bureau of National Affairs), p. vii. ISBN 0-87179-488-8.
External links
- Text of Towne v. Eisner, 245 U.S. 418 (1918) is available from: Cornell CourtListener Findlaw Google Scholar Justia Library of Congress
Recent Comments