Talk:Bowers v. Kerbaugh-Empire Co.

United States: Government Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).

U.S. Supreme Court cases

	This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Law

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Taxation (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taxation, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.TaxationWikipedia:WikiProject TaxationTemplate:WikiProject TaxationTaxation articles

Case frequently quoted

A section on quotes from this case could be added.

Quotes from the opinion of this case are found being used in several other aspects of income tax issues.

Notably: "A statute is so vague as to violate the due process clause .... & ...holding of the Pollock court related to income from capital investments, it is submitted the 16th Amendment is irrelevant to an issue of wages/salaries. Agreement is found in Bower v Kerbaugh-Empire, 271 US 170, 174 (1926) and Eisner v Macomber, 252 US 189, 206 (1920). among others 16:46, 30 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.177.80.36 (talk • contribs)

Dear user at IP 76.177.80.36: I'm not sure what you are driving at here. These quotations are not found in the text of the case of Bowers v. Kerbaugh-Empire. I'll check Eisner v. Macomber and get back to you. Yours, Famspear (talk) 18:59, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear user at IP 76.177.80.36: OK, the quotations are not from Eisner v. Macomber either. The quotations have been removed from the article. Famspear (talk) 19:02, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects needed

Done. BD2412 T 22:16, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]