United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
705 F.2d 1418 (1983)
From 1971 to 1973, John Byram (plaintiff) sold 22 pieces of realty. Byram sold seven pieces of realty for a profit of $2.5 million in 1973. Byram was not a licensed realtor and did not advertise or solicit these sales, which were initiated by the purchasers. Byram had owned the seven pieces of realty for longer than the time required for the profit to qualify as a long-term capital gain. Byram included the profit on his 1973 tax return as capital gain. A tax deficiency was assessed against Byram by the United States government (government) (defendant). After paying the deficiency, Byram filed suit against the government in federal district court for a refund. The district court applied a seven-factor test and held that Byram’s profit was a capital gain, not ordinary income. The government appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Gee, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 219,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.