More From This User
Related Docuements
Reed Elsevier Supreme Court Oral Argument Transcript
Oral argument transcript in the Reed Elsevier case before the US Supreme Court
From Daniel Ballard
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425
Official - Subject to Final Review
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - xMICHAEL H. BOULWARE, :Petitioner :v. : No. 06-1509UNITED STATES. :- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - xWashington, D.C.Tuesday, January 8, 2008The above-entitled matter came on for oralargument before the Supreme Court of the United Statesat 10:52 a.m.APPEARANCES:JOHN D. CLINE, ESQ., San Francisco, Cal.; on behalf ofthe Petitioner.DEANNE E. MAYNARD, ESQ., Assistant to the SolicitorGeneral, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.; onbehalf of the Respondent.1
Alderson Reporting Company
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425
Official - Subject to Final Review
C O N T E N T SORAL ARGUMENT OF PAGEJOHN D. CLINE, ESQ.On behalf of the Petitioner 3
DEANNE E. MAYNARD, ESQ.
On behalf of the Respondent 20
REBUTTAL ARGUMENT OF
JOHN D. CLINE, ESQ.
On behalf of the Petitioner 50
2
Alderson Reporting Company
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425
Official - Subject to Final Review
P R O C E E D I N G S(10:52 a.m.)CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: We'll hear argumentnext in Case 06-1509, Boulware v. United States.Mr. Cline.ORAL ARGUMENT OF JOHN D. CLINEON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERMR. CLINE: Mr. Chief Justice, and may itplease the Court:Congress placed the phrase "with respect toits stock" in Section 301(a) of the Internal RevenueCode to make clear that the taxation rules in Section301(c) do not apply to corporate payments that ashareholder receives in a nonshareholder capacity.JUSTICE SOUTER: May I ask you a questionwhich is going to come up sooner or later? And it'skind of a threshold question. So, if I may, let meinterrupt you with it now. You emphasize thesignificance of the limiting condition "with respect tothe stock." But before you get to that phrase, Section301 refers to a distribution by the corporation. And myquestion is this: Let's assume that we -- we acceptyour -- your position that the circuit was wrong inrequiring an offer of proof of intent to return capital.Isn't it also the case that you would still have an3
Alderson Reporting Company
of 00
US Supreme Court: 06-1509
91 Reads
Info and Rating
| Category: | Uncategorized. |
| Rating: | |
| Upload Date: | 01/19/2008 |
| Copyright: | Attribution Non-commercial |
| Tags: |
Leave a Comment