Connection lost
Server error
Gray v. Darlington Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A taxpayer sold bonds for a profit that accrued over four years. The Supreme Court held that this profit was not taxable as “income” for the single year of the sale, as it represented a gradual increase in capital, not annual gains.
Legal Significance: This case established an early, foundational principle in U.S. tax law: mere appreciation in property value is not taxable income. It introduced the concept that income should be measured on an annual basis, distinguishing capital appreciation from annual gains.
Gray v. Darlington Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
In 1865, the plaintiff acquired United States five-twenty bonds. In 1869, he sold these bonds, realizing a profit of $20,000 over their original cost. A federal tax assessor, acting under the authority of the Revenue Act of 1867, assessed a 5% tax on the entire $20,000 gain, treating it as “gains, profits, and income” for the year 1869. The Revenue Act imposed a tax to be “levied, collected, and paid annually upon the gains, profits, and income of every person.” After the assessment was affirmed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, the plaintiff paid the tax under protest to the defendant, the district collector. The plaintiff then initiated this lawsuit to recover the amount paid, arguing that the gain, which had accrued over four years, was not taxable as income in the single year of the sale.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the appreciation in the value of bonds over a four-year period, realized through a sale in a single year, constitute taxable “gains, profits, or income” for the year of the sale under the Revenue Act of 1867?
No. The advance in the value of the bonds was not taxable Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does the appreciation in the value of bonds over a four-year period, realized through a sale in a single year, constitute taxable “gains, profits, or income” for the year of the sale under the Revenue Act of 1867?
Conclusion
This case established the early tax law principle that income is measured Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in
Legal Rule
Under the Revenue Act of 1867 (14 Stat. at Large, 477-8), the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex
Legal Analysis
The Court's analysis centered on the statutory requirement that the tax be Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occ
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The Court held that profit from the sale of bonds held