Commissioner v. Culbertson case brief
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
337 U.S. 733, 69 S. Ct. 1210, 93 L. Ed.
1659, 1949 U.S.
CASE SYNOPSIS: Petitioner Internal
Revenue Service commissioner appealed a judgment of the Court of
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversing petitioner's determination of
a deficiency in respondent's income tax for 1940 and 1941, which was
sustained by the Tax Court. Petitioner maintained that the entire
income from a partnership entered into by respondent and his four
sons was taxable to respondent.
FACTS: Respondent entered into an oral partnership agreement with his four sons to join in the operation of a cattle ranch. Respondent sold an undivided one-half interest to the four sons, which was to be paid under a note due one year later. A partnership return was filed for two years, indicating a division of income approximating the capital attributed to each partner. Petitioner Internal Revenue Service commissioner made a determination of a deficiency in respondent's income tax for both years, which was sustained by the Tax Court. Petitioner appealed an appellate court judgment reversing the determination.
FACTS: Respondent entered into an oral partnership agreement with his four sons to join in the operation of a cattle ranch. Respondent sold an undivided one-half interest to the four sons, which was to be paid under a note due one year later. A partnership return was filed for two years, indicating a division of income approximating the capital attributed to each partner. Petitioner Internal Revenue Service commissioner made a determination of a deficiency in respondent's income tax for both years, which was sustained by the Tax Court. Petitioner appealed an appellate court judgment reversing the determination.
ANALYSIS:
On certiorari, the court reversed and
remanded the case to the Tax Court for a decision as to which, if
any, of respondent's sons were partners during the two tax years
because the lower court applied an improper objective standard. The
court ruled that under the correct standard, if upon consideration of
all the facts, it was found that partners joined together in good
faith to conduct a business, having agreed that the services or
capital to be contributed by each was of such value that the
contributor should participate in the distribution of profits, that
was sufficient.
CONCLUSION: The court reversed the judgment and remanded.
---
CONCLUSION: The court reversed the judgment and remanded.
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment