Joseph Radtke, SC v. United States
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin
712 F. Supp. 143 (1989)
John Radtke (Mr. Radtke) was the sole incorporator, director, shareholder, and employee of Joseph Radtke, SC (the Radtke corporation) (plaintiff). In 1982, Mr. Radtke did not receive a salary from the Radtke corporation. Instead, Mr. Radtke received $18,000 in dividends. Mr. Radtke declared the dividends as income and paid personal income tax on them. The Radtke corporation did not pay federal employment taxes for the dividend distributed to Mr. Radtke. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) (defendant) assessed a deficiency against the Radtke corporation for failure to pay employment taxes. The Radtke corporation paid some of the deficiency and filed a claim for a refund in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Evans, 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 707,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead 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.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 707,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,500 briefs, keyed to 983 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.