Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. v. United States
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
568 F.2d 811 (1976)
- Written by Heather Ryfa, JD
Facts
Aetna Life Insurance Company (Aetna Life) was a Connecticut corporation that held 61.6 percent of the voting common stock of The Aetna Casualty and Surety Company (Old Aetna), a Connecticut corporation. Both corporations sold insurance but specialized in different types. Aetna Life organized Farmington Valley Insurance Company (Farmington Valley) as a wholly owned subsidiary also incorporated in Connecticut. As a result of this three-way corporate reorganization, the shareholders of Old Aetna received shares of Aetna Life. Aetna Life merged Old Aetna into Farmington Valley, and the shares of Farmington Valley were placed in a trust for Aetna Life shareholders. Therefore, the minority shareholders of Old Aetna still indirectly had an interest in New Aetna through their shares of Aetna Life. Farmington Valley later changed its name to The Aetna Casualty Surety Company (New Aetna) (plaintiff). New Aetna sought to carry back net operating losses to periods prior to the merger to offset Old Aetna’s taxable income. The commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service (United States) (defendant) disallowed the deduction. New Aetna appealed to the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, which ruled in favor of the United States. New Aetna appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Timbers, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

