Druker v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
| Druker v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit |
| Full case name | James O. Druker and Joan S. Druker v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue |
| Argued | September 16, 1982 |
| Decided | December 22, 1982 |
| Citation(s) | 697 F.2d 46 |
| Case history | |
| Prior action(s) | 77 T.C. 867 (1981) |
| Court membership | |
| Judge(s) sitting | Wilfred Feinberg, Henry Friendly, Irving Kaufman |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Friendly, joined by a unanimous court |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S Const. amend XIV | |
Druker v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 697 F.2d 46 (2d Cir. 1982)[1], is a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirming the constitutionality of the marriage penalty.
The plaintiffs, James O. Druker and his wife Joan, claimed that the "income tax structure unfairly discriminates against working married couples" in violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.[1]
References
- 1 2 Druker v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 697 F.2d 46 (2d Cir. 1982).
External links
- Text of Druker v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 697 F.2d 46 (2d Cir. 1982) is available from: CourtListener Justia OpenJurist Google Scholar
This article is issued from
Wikipedia.
The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike.
Additional terms may apply for the media files.