|
|
O’malley v. Woodrough, 307 U.S. 277 (1939)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
O’malley v. Woodrough, 307 U.S. 277 (1939)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 307 U.S. 268, click here.
O’Malley v. Woodrough No. 810 Argued April 28, 1939 Decided May 22, 1939 307 U.S. 277
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
Syllabus
1. The provision of § 22(a) of the Revenue Act of 1936, requiring that there be included in gross income, for the purpose of computing the federal income tax, the compensation of "judges of courts of the United States taking office after June 6, 1932" -- which provision was a reenactment of a similar provision contained in the Revenue Act of June 6, 1932, and part of a taxing measure of general, nondiscriminatory application to all earners of income, -- held constitutional as applied to a judge who was appointed to the Circuit Court of Appeals subsequently to June 6, 1932. P. 281.
2. The provision in question cannot be regarded as effecting a diminution of the compensation of the judge in violation of the Constitution, Art. III, § 1, nor as an encroachment on the independence of the judiciary. P. 282.
Congress did not exceed its constitutional power in providing that United States judges appointed after the Revenue Act of 1932 shall not enjoy immunity from the incidences of taxation to which everyone else within the defined classes of income is subjected.
3. The fact that, at the time of the judge’s appointment to the Circuit Court of Appeals, he held the office of federal district judge, to which he had been appointed prior to June 6, 1932, is irrelevant to the matter in issue. P. 279.
Reversed.
Appeal under § 2 of the Act of Aug. 24, 1937, from a judgment of the District Court denying the Government’s motion to dismiss a suit for a refund of income taxes collected under an allegedly unconstitutional Act.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," O’malley v. Woodrough, 307 U.S. 277 (1939) in 307 U.S. 277 307 U.S. 278. Original Sources, accessed November 25, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=AX3TW41J8SX3V3H.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." O’malley v. Woodrough, 307 U.S. 277 (1939), in 307 U.S. 277, page 307 U.S. 278. Original Sources. 25 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=AX3TW41J8SX3V3H.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in O’malley v. Woodrough, 307 U.S. 277 (1939). cited in 1939, 307 U.S. 277, pp.307 U.S. 278. Original Sources, retrieved 25 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=AX3TW41J8SX3V3H.
|